Joined: 28 Jul 2005 Posts: 274 Location: North West London
Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2008 4:52 pm Post subject: Have I harassed victim-familes?
Have I harassed victim-familes?
The character-assassin Rachel North has averred that I have ‘harassed’ survivor-families of July 7th. (1) Then The Observer has repeated this slander (Cohen, May 4th). So let’s see what happened.
1. In Kingston Crown court, where the ‘July 7th’ case was ongoing, I was sitting quietly at around 10 am on 14th April waiting to enter the court. I asked some people sitting next to me if they had been there the day before. They had, they replied. In that case, I said, might I ask them whether they could confirm, from their memory, that certain words had been spoken? They said yes, so I then showed them the ‘Metro’ – it was reporting on the Prosecution’s case, averring that peroxide and black pepper had been used at 18, Alexander Grove, Leeds, to make the explosive that blew the trains up. We had all heard the mention of hydrogen peroxide yesterday, but I had not caught any mention of black pepper? One of these three replied that, yes, she had heard the word ‘pepper’ being used in that context.
Just as she was saying this, a yellow- clad security guard came up to me, and indicated that it was not appropriate for me to talk to that family, because they were relatives of a 7/7 victim, so I duly apologised. That was all. From my point of view, it was important to have obtained confirmation that the new (and very absurd) explosive recipe, for what blew up the trains, had indeed been given, as The Metro stated. Then the next day Rachel North was averring on her blog that I had ‘harassed’ a victim family. There were other comments she made about me, which gave the impression that he was somehow spying on me during those court visits, or as if someone were informing her of my presence there. I never saw her there.
2. At lunch-break at the Kingston CC, a chap came up and started chatting to me, who had been on the Aldgate Circle Line train, coach adjacent to the one which blew up. Actually this is the kind of thing that makes a visit to that Court worthwhile. I posted this conversation on the nineeleven.co.uk site as being of some interest – his bewilderment about all the reports of bombs on different trains going ‘the wrong way.’ It was only several days later, he told me, that the media came to agree concerning the train he had been on, viz. a circle line train going away from King's Cross. He left me his e-address and we parted cordially.
Here is RN’s account: ‘
Quote:
He bothered a man who survived the Aldgate bombings, told him about his barking ''theories'' about 7/7 ( he claims the bombers were innocent ''patsies'' executed by the State who were behind the bombings)….Kollerstrom was spotted by me at Kingston Crown Court last Monday hassling an Aldgate survivor….. I was chatting to Blairwatch about Monday's events, and mentioned I'd seen Kollerstrom, and spoken to the man he was hassling afterwards, when we were watching the afternoon's events in court. The man expressed concern and irritation at being barracked over lunch by 'a nut'.
No way should one believe RN’s account of how I came up to this person and ‘bothered’ or ‘hassled’ or ‘barracked’ him. But, he never got back to me and I wondered if this was R.N.’s influence. I would certainly not have shared ‘theories’ about 7/7 with a stranger in Kingston Crown court! I just said to him that I kept an open mind on the subject. Sounds to me more likely that it was RN who ‘told him his barking ‘theories about 7/7’ i.e. poisoned his mind against me. I have never seen Rachel at this Court (she I guess goes into a different room where the ‘families' watch the events) and I’m sure she wasn’t in the café where this chap chatted to me, so how come she got to hear this story? As a member of the King’s Cross Survivor’s group how come she got to know this chap? I find myself wondering whether RN’s ‘spotted by me’ means, viewed via a CCTV camera by someone?
3. I phoned up Mr S. who was on the Piccadilly line train that exploded, 3rd coach from the front. He worked at Harrod’s. (2) I asked him whether I could ask him one or two questions. He said yes and that I could ring him back later. So I did. His account was very clarifying. Certain features of that train journey given in Rachel’s book were paradoxical, viz the train not having stopped at the previous 8 stations prior to King’s Cross, and the platform being more crowded than any previous time she could remember by the time it got there, and Mr S’s account greatly clarified this. Rachel wrote in reply to my account (on the nineeleven.co.uk site) ‘now do you believe me?’ and in essence the answer was ‘yes.’ An independent account had given us a much clearer view of a much-debated aspect of the story.
Here is RN’s version on Blairwatch: ‘He once phoned up a 7/7 survivor in my carriage whilst the man was at work and asked him questions about the bombings.’ Can this woman not say anything that is true? Mr S. was in the second carriage, adjacent to the one that was bombed.
I did venture to phone Mr S. one more time. He had been the co-founder with Rachel of the King’s Cross survivor group. I asked him, though somewhat obliquely, if he would confirm that he was not aware of anyone in that group having the memory of a Muslim hijacker with rucksack, on that train, and his reply did confirm that. He had no objection to me phoning him.
4. Lastly, I was asked (by Muad’Dib, author of The Ripple Effect) to phone up the father of Myriam Hyman. Now, he was clearly unhappy at my phoning him, I’d say. But, he could have said ‘no’ when I asked his permission if I could ask him about his daughter’s awful fate. He did not. He could have put the phone down, he did not. After I reported his words, the julyseventh.co.uk put out a statement saying they did not approve of troubling survivor’s families in this manner, because it might upset them. My comment here is that all of us are upset by July 7th, and together we need to get the truth of what happened. In all three of these cases I reckon I posted a report on the nineeleven.co.uk site (7/7 section) within a day or so, to make sure my memory was reliable. Much later on the sister of MH rang me, and said I had caused distress to the family by my report, and would I please take it down? I took it down at once, because I don’t want to cause distress to anyone.
But, with all due respect, it was the family of MH that made the event one of public concern and interest, in the first place. They now believe, one gathers, that MH was on the 30 bus that blew up and that her body was seen and identified by a BMA staff member, lying on the pavement, and her name is now on the plaque at Tavistock Square, one of the 13. What is strange here is that, within the first week after the event, MH’s family put up posters around King’s Cross asking if anyone had seen her, and also they enquired in hospitals as to whether they had her. MH’s mother then made a statement to a newspaper to this effect, that they had been making this big effort to find her. At the end of that, they did not put out a statement as to how strange they felt, to learn that the body had been right there all this time, lying next to the bus. Earlier, the father had made a statement, to an international newspaper, saying that that he was not willing to believe such a story, because MH had phoned him at 09.45, from King’s Cross station, and the 30 bus had blown up two minutes later.
Now I phoned him up, asking him if I might have permission to ask him about the tragic event? After he replied in the affirmative I asked him as to whether he had indeed received a last phone call from his daughter that morning? Yes he replied, and he confirmed to me that it was indeed at 09.45. He also confirmed that it had been made from King’s Cross station. There was some story about her having then made a further phone call to her place of work at Canary Wharf but he denied this, on the grounds that his daughter had been killed on the bus. I don’t dare say any more.
He could have said that he did not remember, or that his memory was hazy, concerning the time of that last phone call, however he did not: he gave the same time to me as he had to the International Herald Tribune. Phoning him up, I was expecting merely to endorse what he had so rightly (IMO) said to the paper: ‘I don’t see how she could have got into the bus that exploded’, he said, ‘And the route makes no sense, whether she’s going to work or home.’ Exactly. When she wished to travel East towards Canary wharf, why – assuming that the Father had misremembered the time of the phone call – would she have rushed westwards to Euston, as would have taken a good ten minutes, and grabbed a bus that was driving, via a detour, back to King’s Cross? Had it not blown up, that bus was due merely to have driven East to King’s Cross station. I asked the sister (who requested me to delete my statement on this matter) for the date when the BMA person had informed the family, in such a way that changed their whole view of the situation, that her body was lying beside the bus, and she said it was on July 11th that they had been informed of identification of the body. (Sources: Jewish Chronicle 15 July, Int Herald Tribune 11 July.)
Given that there will never be a public enquiry into 7/7, as we would all like to have, it seems to me that attempts to contact persons who have important memories, and to record these, before they fade away, is commendable. I’ve had various complete brush-offs, eg from Tubeline officials, explaining that their drivers are just too traumatised from events of two years ago to be prepared to give any public interviews or make any public statements at all – whatever one may think of that. I greatly respect persons who are prepared to share their memories, even where personal trauma is involved. I hope we may maintain standards of polite behaviour in this endeavour.
1. On her own blog and also on the Blairwatch site.
2. Thaks to Muad’Dib for help here.
Joined: 10 Dec 2005 Posts: 2017 Location: Croydon, Surrey
Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2008 5:53 pm Post subject:
Those of us who know you, respect you and thank you for your efforts.
It is a sad world when it is left to a lone researcher like yourself to investigate and try to resolve anomalies of evidence relating to an incident of such profound seriousness.
We are familiar with RN's vitriol and know her form. There are no words I can think of that might help in this situation.
Nick, they do not want the relatives to start thinking again, as they originally were immediately after the attacks. It is dangerous for those behind the attacks, and this is why so much fuss is made when someone approaches relatives. Words are even put in their mouths, "the relatives do not wish to speak of this". When plainly, some do, otherwise they would all say they have nothing to say when approached, and at least two relatives would not have answered your questions.
At times like these, I'm reminded of a scene from the movie They Live, where the main character Nada goes to such lengths as to physically fight with his friend Frank, for Frank's own good, to get him to put the glasses on so that he too can see the truth.
And of course, those who are not wearing the glasses, even though they may wear half of them, cannot interpret things like these correctly, as this Sura in the Koran illustrates:-
* Sura18:66. Moses said to him: "May I follow thee, on the footing that thou teach me something of the (Higher) Truth which thou hast been taught?"
18:67. (The other) said: "Verily thou wilt not be able to have patience with me!"
18:68. "And how can thou have patience about things about which thy understanding is not complete?"
18:69. Moses said: "Thou wilt find me, if "I AM" so will, (truly) patient: nor shall I disobey thee in anything."
18:70. The other said: "If then thou wouldst follow me, ask me no questions about anything until I myself speak to thee concerning it."
18:71. So they both proceeded: until, when they were in the boat, he scuttled it. Said Moses: "Hast thou scuttled it in order to drown those in it? Truly a strange thing hast thou done!"
18:72. He answered: "Did I not tell thee that thou canst have no patience with me?"
18:73. Moses said: "Rebuke me not for forgetting, nor grieve me by raising difficulties in my case."
18:74. Then they proceeded: until, when they met a young man, he slew him. Moses said: "Hast thou slain an innocent person who had slain none? Truly a foul (unheard of) thing hast thou done!"
18:75. He answered: "Did I not tell thee that thou canst have no patience with me?"
18:76. (Moses) said: "If ever I ask thee about anything after this, keep me not in thy company: then wouldst thou have received (full) excuse from my side."
18:77. Then they proceeded: until, when they came to the inhabitants of a town, they asked them for food, but they refused them hospitality. They found there a wall on the point of falling down, but he set it up straight. (Moses) said: "If thou hadst wished, surely thou couldst have exacted some payment for it!"
18:78. He answered: "This is the parting between me and thee: now will I tell thee the interpretation of (those things) over which thou wast unable to hold patience.
18:79. "As for the boat, it belonged to certain men in dire need: they worked on the water: I only wished to render it unserviceable, for there was a certain king after them, who seized every boat by force.
18:80. "As for the youth, his parents were people of Faith, and We feared that he would grieve them by obstinate rebellion and ingratitude (to "I AM" and man).
18:81. "So We desired that their Lord would give them, in exchange, (a son) better in purity (of conduct) and closer in affection.
18:82. "As for the wall, it belonged to two youths, orphans, in the Town; there was, beneath it, a buried treasure, to which they were entitled: their father had been a righteous man: so thy Lord desired that they should attain their age of full strength and get out their treasure - a mercy (and favour) from thy Lord. I did it not of my own accord. Such is the interpretation of (those things) over which thou wast unable to hold patience." http://www.jahtruth.net/flute.htm
IF you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:
If you can dream - and not make dreams your master;
If you can think - and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools:
If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breathe a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: 'Hold on!'
If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
' Or walk with Kings - nor lose the common touch,
if neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you,
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And - which is more - you'll be a Man, my son!
Nick, keep your head up high. Your 7/7 research has got the ptb worried. Rachel North is an appalling person for the way she has treated you - we all know her tactics and her methods. 'Truth without fear' must be the way forward for all of us if we are to prevent the dreadful things planned for the human race. We may sometimes question your judgement about the topics you research, but we all know that you are a man of immense integrity, openess and courage. Good luck to you and don't let the buggers grind you down - you've still got a lot to contribute and we view you as a much valued friend and truther. _________________ Connect to Infinite Consciousness - enjoy the ride!
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 1491 Location: North Lancashire
Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 9:51 am Post subject:
Thanx for posting that Rudyard Kipling poem Danny, : its one of my favourites and always empowers you to do what you feel is right especially when as a truthseekers you are under attack.
Quote:
Nick, keep your head up high. Your 7/7 research has got the ptb worried. Rachel North is an appalling person for the way she has treated you - we all know her tactics and her methods. 'Truth without fear' must be the way forward for all of us if we are to prevent the dreadful things planned for the human race. We may sometimes question your judgement about the topics you research, but we all know that you are a man of immense integrity, openess and courage. Good luck to you and don't let the buggers grind you down - you've still got a lot to contribute and we view you as a much valued friend and truther
Totally agree with Justins statement having followed Rachels posts on here and her consistent attack on the 7/7 and 911 truth movement. Also saw these tactics employed at a Milan Rai presentation and his national booklauch presentation in Kendal on the subject of Iraq and terrorism/Muslim extremism back in April 2006; relevant link here:-
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=5211&highlight=#5211
Keep asking those tough questions Nick, as a fellow thruthseeker iI'm with you all the way. _________________ Pikey
It is good to get Nick's side of this story. Assuming this is accurate then it seems that Rachel North has put a considerable spin on her account ..... Words like 'barracking', 'hassling', 'bothered' do not fit with Nick's account of events at Kingston Court.
However, I take Danny's support in this with a big pinch of salt, given that he is a follower of Muad Dib.
Presuming Nick has been quoted accurately I believe he is right to say contacting MH's father was wrong.
Quote:
Dr Kollerstrom, 61, denied pestering the families of those killed in the London bombings but admitted he should not have contacted the father of one of the victims to suggest that she was not killed on the No 30 bus.
"It was wrong to do that but somebody urged me to do it because they said it was vital information," he said.
"I raised the question, 'Was she on the bus?' and the family were very upset because they are convinced she was."
I think this phone call could be construed as harrassment and was certainly ill-judged, upsetting and insensitive
Given that it was Muad Dib who urged Nick to contact the family, this displays very poor judgement on Muad Dib's behalf as well.
Further I strongly suggest that Nick is the last person to volunteer to contact any family members of July 7 victims since this is a role that requires extreme tact, sensitivity and empathy, something that Nick clearly lacks, as demonstrated by his decisiomn to put his controversial and in my opinion absurd and insulting views on the nazi camps in the public domain.
Sure Nick requires a degree of understanding at a personal level in what must be difficult times for him, but that shouldn't cloud our judgement or stop us criticising both his views and ill-judged actions where this is warranted.
Joined: 10 Dec 2005 Posts: 2017 Location: Croydon, Surrey
Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 1:43 pm Post subject:
ian neal wrote:
absurd and insulting views on the nazi camps
Yes, it IS absurd and insulting to suggest that Nazi did not mass-murder Jews during WW2. They killed 2 or 3 million Poles so why would they spare "the Jews"?
However, everything I have seen about the 'Auschwitz story' indicates that Nick is correct on that particular issue, i.e. the industialised gassing of 4 million (later changed to 1.1 million) people.
Maybe it is insulting to pick out this issue when there was so much obvious murder and real suffering involved.....but the issue, unlike the victims, is not dead.
It is alive, in use and battering us into submission every day of the week.
No one dare say that the ownership of the media by individuals who are a part of the Jewish body politic is connected to the fact that the truth about 9/11 is kept from us.
No one dare say that our economic sanctions against the poor suffering people of gaza is because our society is dominated by a Jewish faction.
This is enough reason IMO for people to justifiably step forward and demand answers on the 'Auschwitz' questions.
Deaths at Auschwitz were recorded in detail....with the name, race and profession of each deceased person written down. When the records were released by the Soviets, the documents showed 30+ thousand Jewish deaths and 37+ thousand other deaths, most deaths occurring during 2 typhus outbreaks on successive years.
The curator of the Auschwitz museum Dr. Piper explained the absence of staining on the 'gas chamber' walls at Auschwitz by saying that it was only in use for 20-30 minutes per day. The film of this interview can be easily seen on google video.
Dogsmilk and many others attack David Cole's documentary and many keep attacking anyone who raises these issues but I have yet to see any satisfactory explanations or contradictions to this evidence.....instead there is just the continual interjection of a massive taboo.
We need to discredit ALL the lies that are being driven into the collective mind. We need to stop the denial and stop deceiving ourselves about who is doing this to us.
It was said that in the old Soviet Union 50% of the communist party were Russian and 50% were Jewish but the Jewish half was dominant because they trusted each other better, were more cohesive and organised.
The financial/corporate oligarchy are probably structured along similar lines...who knows?......
......i don't care if I am banned for saying this and this is not about individual jewish people though individually jews are likely to take offence.......but there is a historical record of collective behaviour by dominant Jews that has (for example) seen them expelled en masse from England....
...this cannot possibly be all be about OUR wickedness!.....as our modern culture would have it.
We are (or were) a Christian country. Christ loved the Jews. He came to help them and lead them. He identified this tendency, the self-seeking other-hating track along which 'The jews were being led by the Pharisses, and condemned it.
He told the truth.
It remains the truth.
Talmudists and Freemasons, by being so determinedly for themselves, are against the rest of us.
I don't understand why there is so much support for Mr Kollerstrom.
How come people can't or won't see how this has/had damaged the integrity of the movement? Or maybe people can but thats not an issue to them. _________________ www.rinf.com
Dogsmilk and many others attack David Cole's documentary and many keep attacking anyone who raises these issues but I have yet to see any satisfactory explanations or contradictions to this evidence.....instead there is just the continual interjection of a massive taboo.
Well considering you're still raising four million at Auschwitz despite the fact I've previously quoted landmark texts from the 50s and 60s that contradict this, have explained exactly where this figure comes from and have yet to see you produce a single example of this figure being used in the West (though I understand there are a few examples) I just wouldn't want to bother any more.
You believe whatever makes you happy, chief.
Some might recommend actually seriously studying the subject - if you read five books, you could consider yourself an even bigger expert than Kollerstrom!
Joined: 10 Dec 2005 Posts: 2017 Location: Croydon, Surrey
Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 4:27 pm Post subject:
Dogsmilk wrote:
Well considering you're still raising four million at Auschwitz despite the fact I've previously quoted landmark texts from the 50s and 60s that contradict this.....
...And you're still saying that. You quote obscure texts.....but I remember the number that was quoted in the media all the time.....to us.....the dopey public at large.
It was 4 million. the plaque in Auschwitz itself said 4 million until it was changed.
Dogsmilk wrote:
You believe whatever makes you happy, chief.
Makes me happy....you creep.
Why don't you explain how Dr. Piper, the man responsible for running the Auschwitz 'museum' at the time, found himself so confused about gas chambers that he said they were only being used for 20-30 minutes per day.
Joined: 14 Dec 2005 Posts: 475 Location: North London
Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 7:51 pm Post subject: Don't believe the media hype
I can’t believe that people are actually suggesting we distance ourselves from Nick. Their problem is that they have been suckered by a nonsense story. The question is where did this story come from? Who told the journalist that Nick was “disgraced”?
What is the story? Why is it given such prominence? Why is it a breach of some rule or morally repugnant for the BBC to pay someone expenses? It is not as if the payments were corrupt. THERE IS NO STORY HERE.
So, they try to make it into a story by claiming Nick is a Holocaust denier. But whether true or not, this has nothing to do with the BBC or the expenses. They then say that Nick ‘pestered’ 7/7 families. But who says this. I have not seen any quote from any family stating that they were pestered by him. What we get is an allegation of pestering. What does it mean? We are meant to think Nick constantly and unwelcomingly pestered suffering families to get answers. But no one says that. What they say is that Nick asked the families about the planting of bodies i.e. pestered meant suggesting that 7/7 was a false flag.
It is actually that allegation that families object to. They are quoted as saying that Nick should not have been given a ‘platform’ on the BBC. But they don’t say he pestered them. The pestering idea comes from Nick admitting that this ‘pestering’ was wrong. That is, the reporter decided there was pestering and then asked Nick to defend himself as if the families had levelled that allegation.
Then we have to ask ourselves which families. The story gives the impression that those they quote are representative of the 7/7 families. Yet, this is not my impression. There are families that question the government version of events. The stories misleadingly suggest there are not.
There may be a story in the BBC ‘giving a platform’ to a ‘Holocaust’ denier. But this is not much of a story anyway because the BBC has been happy to allow Nick Griffin to drivel on. But reporters could not focus on that because they couldn’t allege that that our Nick is a fascist and they may end up having to deal with the evidence Nick puts forward.
I for one no longer believe that there was a systematic attempt by the Nazis to gas Jews. I didn’t used to believe that. In fact, I’ve had conversations with people about 18 million killed (not just Jews) by Nazis in concentration camps. I accepted the figure on good faith then, now I think it is totally absurd. And if you said to most people that there were not 6 million Jews in all those countries from where they were taken, most people would not be in a position to deny it. (Researchers claim that half the Jewish people killed were from Poland.)
We should not start harassing Nick because he questions the so-called Holocaust. Questioning it should not be banned by this site, questioning without evidence should be.
If the 911-truth community thinks that the Holocaust issue (or no planes) is one that the media will attack us on, they must be deluded. If Nick had written a book stating that Al Qaida was an Anglo-American proxy, do you think they wouldn’t have attacked him? I wish I had done half the research on 7/7 that Nick has done.
When a member of our movement is attacked by the media, we should not be attacking them, we should be attacking the poor journalism that is always behind it. We should do that in this case.
Well considering you're still raising four million at Auschwitz despite the fact I've previously quoted landmark texts from the 50s and 60s that contradict this.....
...And you're still saying that. You quote obscure texts.....but I remember the number that was quoted in the media all the time.....to us.....the dopey public at large.
It was 4 million. the plaque in Auschwitz itself said 4 million until it was changed.
Dogsmilk wrote:
You believe whatever makes you happy, chief.
Makes me happy....you creep.
Why don't you explain how Dr. Piper, the man responsible for running the Auschwitz 'museum' at the time, found himself so confused about gas chambers that he said they were only being used for 20-30 minutes per day.
.
Do you mean "obscure texts" like Hilberg, arguably the most famous and prestigious scholarly work on the subject?
Still waiting for that example.
But who cares? Which do you regard as generally more accurate - serious scholarship or some documentary you saw on telly? I realise you probably think there's some vast media conspiracy to push four million on an unsuspecting public (for some obscure reason) until, er, 'official' historians (including Dr Piper as it happens - he was one of those pushing for the plaque to be changed) got their way. Helped - as previously explained - by further research facilitated by Poland becoming more open to researchers. This is such a mad, incoherent narrative if it's what you're into there is no point us communicating at all - I may as well be writing in Chinese we're such worlds apart.
Ooh a plaque at a Polish museum was changed. How Holocaust-overturningly important.
Yes, whatever makes you happy. You believe what you like. What do I care?
I'd have to watch the film again (I'd rather not), but I think at a time is probably more accurate. There is no compelling reason why Prussian blue should inevitably have formed.
Btw - can you actually substantiate this "most deaths from typhus" recorded in the death books? You may actually find about 2060 deaths were attributed to typhus. I expect you have been reading one of the several denier sites that carefully omit that particular statistic. There was, however, a bizarre rash of "heart attacks" and the like among frequently young inmates. Interestingly, the emergence of these books served to corroborate the testimony of those inmates tasked with record keeping who claimed they had to record such causes of death for those that had been murdered. Of course, the books record registered inmates - those gassed on arrival were (with one exception IIRC) not registered at the camp and don't feature. Pretty sensible really - as well as not leaving an obvious paper trail regarding genocide, there really is no point registering people at a camp then killing them half an hour later is there? Still, it's a sad, tired old denier argument that still has the power to beguile the ignorant.
Ooh a plaque at a Polish museum was changed. How Holocaust-overturningly important.
Yes, whatever makes you happy. You believe what you like. What do I care?
This sort of exaggeration does nothing for your case Dogsmilk. In principle I should agree with you but reading this I find myself sympathising with Nick.
It's not "my case" and the status of the '4 million' as a total non argument remains no matter how I may choose to express it.
A great deal if your posts are anything to go by. A multitude of topics over weeks and weeks, mostly to do with 9/11 or the associated "war on terror" and you almost exclusively post on topics to do with the "Holocaust". It is obviously the case that when others question things which you believe are sacrosanct you feel the need to dive in every time. _________________ "The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell.
I don't understand why there is so much support for Mr Kollerstrom.
How come people can't or won't see how this has/had damaged the integrity of the movement? Or maybe people can but thats not an issue to them.
Hello Sixy.
This movement was damaged beyond repair ages ago and it had nothing to do with Nick.
Nick had advanced the cause of 7/7 truth more than the majority of people. I support and encourage his research and await publication of his book with keen anticipation.
Sixy wrote:
Christ loved the Jews
Christ was a Jew..
This is a joke right?
I had heard that in America there have been some wierd sects set up. But i didnt realise they had migrated to the UK.
I went to a Cof E school.
Christ hated Jews, he rejected Judaism and denounced the Scribes and Pharisees. Jesus was enraged at the evil deeds such as moneychanging that went on in the Temples.
Jesus was as anti Jewish as you could be.
The Jewish King Herod ordered every Jewish baby boy executed because he wanted to kill Christ.
The Jewish King ordered the beheading of John the Baptist.
And the Jewish priests branded Jesus a heretic and implored the Roman Govenor to arrest Jesus and then pushed for his execution.
The Romans offered a pardon for Jesus but instead they chose to Pardon Barabus.
The Jews say an eye for an eye
Jesus said turn the other cheek.
Jesus was an anti Jew.
But again i guess if you have a blinkered view it makes you less likely to blame Mossad and others for 911 and 7/7. _________________
I see no reason why jewish families should be offended by an issue of numbers. No argument of this sort, as with the number of deaths in Iraq, can be definitive, Everybody will believe what appears most credible to them with the information available.
Why do we need to walk on eggshells with regard to this and that belief held by individual members. Certain elements of the press and media will try to exploit anything it can find, or make up, to discredit anyone who questions the 7/7 events. For my mind, there is no such thing as bad publicity.
As to the families of those who died. Nobody can hold more sway in public opinion as those who suffered loss in 7/7. But as with the jersey girls in the states, if they are in need of answers they must form a group from within. Im sure the vast majority has already seen most of the videos linked from this site. And while they must know it a hard task with little reward for them to stand up and be counted as a protester against the official version of events, they have to do it for themselves, possibly through their legal representatives.
And, organisations such as 7/7 truth can only offer productive support when they are approached by family members.
I don't understand why there is so much support for Mr Kollerstrom.
How come people can't or won't see how this has/had damaged the integrity of the movement? Or maybe people can but thats not an issue to them.
Hello Sixy.
This movement was damaged beyond repair ages ago and it had nothing to do with Nick.
Nick had advanced the cause of 7/7 truth more than the majority of people. I support and encourage his research and await publication of his book with keen anticipation.
Sixy wrote:
Christ loved the Jews
Christ was a Jew..
This is a joke right?
I had heard that in America there have been some wierd sects set up. But i didnt realise they had migrated to the UK.
I went to a Cof E school.
Christ hated Jews, he rejected Judaism and denounced the Scribes and Pharisees. Jesus was enraged at the evil deeds such as moneychanging that went on in the Temples.
Jesus was as anti Jewish as you could be.
The Jewish King Herod ordered every Jewish baby boy executed because he wanted to kill Christ.
The Jewish King ordered the beheading of John the Baptist.
And the Jewish priests branded Jesus a heretic and implored the Roman Govenor to arrest Jesus and then pushed for his execution.
The Romans offered a pardon for Jesus but instead they chose to Pardon Barabus.
The Jews say an eye for an eye
Jesus said turn the other cheek.
Jesus was an anti Jew.
But again i guess if you have a blinkered view it makes you less likely to blame Mossad and others for 911 and 7/7.
Please define anti Jew.
These comments are anti jewish IMO. To attack a whole faith on the corrupt actions of a King and some Priests is nothing I wish to be associated with
I see no reason why jewish families should be offended by an issue of numbers. No argument of this sort, as with the number of deaths in Iraq, can be definitive, Everybody will believe what appears most credible to them with the information available.
Why do we need to walk on eggshells with regard to this and that belief held by individual members. Certain elements of the press and media will try to exploit anything it can find, or make up, to discredit anyone who questions the 7/7 events. For my mind, there is no such thing as bad publicity.
Many of these issues were 'explored' ad nauseum on the 'holocaust' thread before the thread was locked and holocaust discussion banned.
Whilst publicity is to be welcomed, we all know the MSM shape that publicity and one of the main strategies to discredit 9/11 and 7/7 truth is to seek to associate them with anti-semitism. Something that Nick and too many others have helped to happen by giving the MSM ammunition. Ammunition that in no way reflects the vast majority of campaigners I have met.
Before anyone jumps on me for appearing to say Nick is an anti-semite, I'm not. I am saying he and too many others who post here have given the MSM the ammunition to suggest this.
Some publicity is much better than other publicity and the recent publicity Nick has attracted has not been good and i'm not happy.
Please explain why every discussion decends to the exact same slanging match? This topic has nothing to do with Jews or World War II yet Dogsmilk, Sixy and others have made that the issue.
This topic was about whether a J7 researcher should approach relatives of victims as part of his ongoing research.
I believe he should in the exact same way that every murder victim's family are interviewed at length by the media.
Madeline's family were interviewed at length, it turned out that McCann was not her father and they were closely linked to the Blairs and other such revelations which indeed led the Portugese police to conclude that they were the culprits.
It is normal procedure for victims families to be asked about the person who died as it may help to track down the killers.
Jean Charles de Menezes family were interviewed and probed at length too.
So what is different about the J7 families?
Why is there a gag on them.
why cant anyone speak to the J7 bus driver?
Why does Richard Jones not exist or John Smeaton for that matter?
When did you last speak to the victim and where were they located are VERY legitimate questions. I would certainly ask them. _________________
Last edited by karlos on Fri Jun 13, 2008 6:51 am; edited 1 time in total
These comments are anti jewish IMO. To attack a whole faith on the corrupt actions of a King and some Priests is nothing I wish to be associated with
Nobody is attacking a whole faith. Correcting an obviously incorrect statement. He wasnt a gentile, he wasnt a Hindu, he wasnt a pagan, he was branded a heretic, so how would you describe Jesus (pbuh) beliefs and teachings?
Why does the BBC condemn a whole faith on the cowardly actions of a few? It is clearly because they want to link the Religion with the unconnected facist political ideology.
So i can ask the qquestion, why does every discussion decend into the same contrived slanging match. There is nothing Jewish about the BBC news item yet they label the attackers as Jewish. Deliberately. Why dont you condemn the BBC as i do for being anti semetic? _________________
Thanx for posting that Rudyard Kipling poem Danny, : its one of my favourites and always empowers you to do what you feel is right especially when as a truthseekers you are under attack.
Exactly. You're welcome.
Truth campaigners should be concentrating on attacking the media's spin and their character assassination methods, and not Nick. Nobody should sacrifice their freedom of mind and speech, in exchange for the good opinion of men, as some here are asking us to do.
Joined: 10 Dec 2005 Posts: 2017 Location: Croydon, Surrey
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 7:17 am Post subject:
Dogsmilk wrote:
But who cares? Which do you regard as generally more accurate - serious scholarship or some documentary you saw on telly?
The point I have been making is how this material has been used against US and to manipulate US. no ordinary member of the public is going to go away and read long academic dissertations on the subject.....
....although why one should trust these any more than the telly God alone knows.
.......the Congressional inquiry into the financial foundations under the leadership of a man called Dodds found that they were implementing a plan to take over the history departments of the great universities way back before the 1930's. The takeover of our countries by the central banking cartels is nowhere to be found in mainstream history textbooks.
This is real history.
Major history.
And it has been written out.
The physical evidence is much more trustworthy.......so I say, along with Nick, what about the absence of staining on the 'human' gas chamber but the deep blue staining on the walls of the delousing chamber. Rubbish him all you like, but when David Cole cornered Dr. Piper on this subject Piper started blabbering the most ridiculous rubbish. The released soviet documents are physical evidence.
I'll tell you what I'd like.
I'd like to be able to trust some authority to investigate these anomalies impartially.
I'd like to see the mainstream media tell the truth about 9/11.
I'd like them to stop participating in attacks on Christianity and Islam and expose talmudic judaism and Freemasonry for what they are.....religions that choose to see the rest of humanity as less than humam.....as 'cattle' to be exploited at will. (Freemasonry takes the new recruit into their 'holy place' blindfolded with a halter round their neck)
......the fact that innocents at the lower degrees within these groups do not participate in nor understand the agenda at the top....which is to gain control of everything.......makes it all the more urgent that they, as well as the public at large, are alerted to the menace.
A great deal if your posts are anything to go by. A multitude of topics over weeks and weeks, mostly to do with 9/11 or the associated "war on terror" and you almost exclusively post on topics to do with the "Holocaust". It is obviously the case that when others question things which you believe are sacrosanct you feel the need to dive in every time.
If I thought it was that sacrosanct, I daresay I wouldn't even enter into a dialogue on the subject.
I do post on it a lot and I have given my reasons for this previously.
But I don't really care what kbo thinks. It's not like I lie awake at night worrying about his erroneous views on the Holocaust or something.
Pugwash wrote:
A Holocaust Denier is surly one who believes no atrocities took place under the Nazis, not one who who disputes the number of deaths.
Typically it tends to centre around denying the existence of gas chambers with a view to ultimately arguing there was no actual genocide and atrocities against Jews are simply to be seen in the context of general war atrocities. Where such as the Gypsies and mentally ill get mentioned (though deniers prefer to focus on Jews) a similar downplaying and denial of gassing usually arises. You can browse old CODOH threads if you want to see this in action.
However, it is a spectrum and some will say atrocities happened, some will deny that e.g. Jews were also shot en masse.
Commonly a notion that the Nazis were a-ok seems to underlie many of the dominant narratives that end up being mindlessly regurgitated round here.
Disputes about exact figures have existed since the end of WWII and this is to be expected. For example, if you do a web trawl on the Cambodian genocide, you will find numerous death tolls cited on various sites. Deniers seem to like constructing straw men about about the 'sacred' six million, conveniently ignoring the fairly wide spectrum of estimates.
kbo234 wrote:
The point I have been making is how this material has been used against US and to manipulate US. no ordinary member of the public is going to go away and read long academic dissertations on the subject.....
And how are you suggesting it has been 'used'? Are you seriously suggesting there has been some kind of diktat whereby the media have deviously plotted en masse to willfully foist an erroneous Soviet death toll for Auschwitz on an unsuspecting public but were totally unable to prevent new research confirming what Western historians had been saying all along and some plaque at a museum being changed? And exactly what is the monumental and society manipulating significance of four million - according to you - being stated in the media up to the 1980s that justified this complex conspiracy?
Or is it perhaps more likely some journalists who don't know much about it looked at what the Auschwitz museum said and just accepted it?
Quote:
...although why one should trust these any more than the telly God alone knows.
Are you being serious?
Quote:
......the Congressional inquiry into the financial foundations under the leadership of a man called Dodds found that they were implementing a plan to take over the history departments of the great universities way back before the 1930's. The takeover of our countries by the central banking cartels is nowhere to be found in mainstream history textbooks.
I am unfamiliar with this and don't know what you mean by 'take over'.
Quote:
The physical evidence is much more trustworthy.......so I say, along with Nick, what about the absence of staining on the 'human' gas chamber but the deep blue staining on the walls of the delousing chamber.
There is no compelling evidence why Prussian blue should inevitably be present. Its formation is highly contingent. Kollerstrom is simply re-hashing old arguments that are over a decade old and are totally old hat. You'll find plenty of stuff about this at HHP. And I will remind you again your hero has consistently refused to debate his 'findings' with anyone knowledgeable. I suspect he knows exactly what the quality of his 'research' actually is.
Quote:
I'd like to be able to trust some authority to investigate these anomalies impartially.
Are you suggesting hundreds of historians in the UK, USA, Germany, Poland etc are all 'controlled'?
Quote:
I'd like to see the mainstream media tell the truth about 9/11.
I'd like to know what the truth about it is.
Quote:
I'd like them to stop participating in attacks on Christianity and Islam and expose talmudic judaism and Freemasonry for what they are.....religions that choose to see the rest of humanity as less than humam.....as 'cattle' to be exploited at will. (Freemasonry takes the new recruit into their 'holy place' blindfolded with a halter round their neck)
So you'd like to stop attacks on the Bible and Koran, but have everyone think the Talmud is inherently evil? Would you like me to carefully select some nasty sounding quotes from the Bible or Koran and then declare this is what Christians and Muslims are like? Shall I make shrill statements about how all Muslims want everyone in the UK to live under strict Shariah Law and see non Muslims as inferior? You denounce sweeping statements about two religious groups and advocate sweeping statements about another. Marvellous. How f*cking rational. Get out of the 1930s for God's sake.
I don't know much about Freemasons but I sincerely doubt they're all evil or all in on some big world spanning plot. I would certainly accept they get out of speeding tickets though. To be honest, I'd kind of like to join them simply to find out what they really get up to, but people like me don't get invited to such things.
Quote:
......the fact that innocents at the lower degrees within these groups do not participate in nor understand the agenda at the top....which is to gain control of everything.......makes it all the more urgent that they, as well as the public at large, are alerted to the menace.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. If you have power, you want more. It is likely if you had that power you would behave in the same way, as would I, while convincing yourself you were doing what was best. It is about how we organise our society and allow people such power as opposed to some secret elite who are somehow intrinsically different from regular human beings, however much Jews or 'Zionists' or whatever may be portrayed as some kind of separate species in a Nazi stylee as so frequently happens round here.
karlos wrote:
Christ hated Jews,
You quite literally couldn't make it up. I am increasingly convinced Karlos is actually a hundred monkeys with a hundred typewriters and each time something resembling a sentence is produced it is posted here.
Joined: 31 Jan 2007 Posts: 296 Location: Halifax, West Yorkshire
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 10:34 am Post subject:
blackcat wrote:
Code:
Truth campaigners should be concentrating on attacking the media's spin and their character assassination methods, and not Nick. Nobody should sacrifice their freedom of mind and speech, in exchange for the good opinion of men, as some here are asking us to do.
Exactly.
Even if Nick were a villain, it would still be undeniable that the Evening Standard article was defamatory. It was also anonymous and therefore cowardly.
Isaac Newton was a scoundrel, but that didn't invalidate his law of gravity, even if he did steal it from Robert Hooke.
Scientific evidence has to stand or fall on its own merits, whatever the supposed character of the researcher.
I, too, have been the subject of a vicious and defamatory campaign. This, too, was on the basis of research which I had carried out, in which I had found information which, it seems, I was not supposed to know.
This was not in the national press, thankfully. It's still all over the Internet, though, and I know that mud sticks, because people do not read official statements properly. They just get an impression and believe it. In my case, I just let it run for a couple of years, until I could prove a fraudulent statement by a professor emeritus from - UCL! (http://rik.poreo.org)
In other words, I was eventually able to put the onus onto the charlatans to prove their case.
The 9/11 Truth Movement is doing the same thing. The film ZERO is excellent in that respect (and others, too!). All the truth movement has to do is to show that there has been a massive cover-up and that there have been massive lies.
All Nick has to do is to challenge UCL to produce the evidence. If they are saying that that evidence does not exist, then what does that make them?
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 Posts: 632 Location: London UK
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 10:53 am Post subject:
karlos wrote:
This topic was about whether a J7 researcher should approach relatives of victims as part of his ongoing research.
Karlos, NK is NOT a J7 researcher. He is a 7/7 researcher.
Just google J7 and you'll find that there is no connection between J7 and 7/7 apart from J7: the July 7th Truth Campaign.
Your constant attempts to conflate NK with J7 are wilfully mendacious.
J7 have never approached victims families, as we made clear when a distressed and bereaved relative contacted us after receiving 7/7 Ripple Effect unsolicited and with no covering note, in the post. He, and I wonder how many other relatives, thought that this dvd had been sent to him by J7. We then added this addendum to our review and rebuttal of 7/7 Ripple Effect:
"As an addendum to the rebuttal and rejection of 7/7 Ripple Effect, J7 received email notification from Muad'Dib requesting cash donations and assistance in contacting the bereaved families and survivors in order to send them unsolicited copies of this film.
J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign immediately responded with a refusal to support or condone the film and J7 researchers universally condemned the intentions of Muad'Dib in the unsolicited sending of the film to bereaved families or survivors, re-iterating the point that J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign have never endeavoured to contact bereaved families or survivors. J7 are not in any way party to the making of the 7/7 Ripple Effect. We do not support the film, its producers, its unsubstantiated conjecture, or the sending of the film to relatives of victims or survivors, nor has J7 provided any assistance with locating relatives of the deceased."
It is clear to us at J7 that many of the actions supported by members of this forum have a damaging effect on our campaign. Is that the intention of some people here?
If people here are truly interested in researching the events in London on 7th July, you could do what we do, and demand answers from the police, the government and the State, after all, that's where the truth will be found. _________________ 'The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought'. JFK
Joined: 10 Dec 2005 Posts: 2017 Location: Croydon, Surrey
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 5:31 pm Post subject:
Dogsmilk wrote:
And how are you suggesting it has been 'used'?
No you're right..........the 'holocaust' still being in our faces nearly every day of the week over sixty years after the event, plane-loads of British schoolchildren being sent there almost free on the condition that they tell all their mates at home about it on return, Sarkozy saying that every French child should 'adopt' a Jewish child holocaust victim.......it is not being used at all.
Christ....Auschwitz is totemic of the whole thing. Some people somewhere have been screaming Auschwitz! Auschwitz! at us for the last 50 years....and it turns out the narrative we've been exposed to is very dodgy indeed.
It is fair that people should demand to know the truth about the events in question....but let me tell you that I'm no more impressed with your statements on the subject than you are with mine.
Quote:
...although why one should trust these any more than the telly God alone knows.
Dogsmilk wrote:
Are you being serious?
Yes.
Quote:
......the Congressional inquiry into the financial foundations under the leadership of a man called Dodds found that they were implementing a plan to take over the history departments of the great universities way back before the 1930's. The takeover of our countries by the central banking cartels is nowhere to be found in mainstream history textbooks.
Dogsmilk wrote:
I am unfamiliar with this and don't know what you mean by 'take over'.
There is no compelling evidence why Prussian blue should inevitably be present.
Yes, I'm sure. One gas chamber deep blue, the other untainted. I suppose that's because the walls had been plastered using marmalade.
Quote:
I'd like to be able to trust some authority to investigate these anomalies impartially.
Dogsmilk wrote:
Are you suggesting hundreds of historians in the UK, USA, Germany, Poland etc are all 'controlled'?
*uck historians! Have you read the latest official histories of 9/11. They were nearly all written by university men, you know.
Quote:
I'd like to see the mainstream media tell the truth about 9/11.
Dogsmilk wrote:
I'd like to know what the truth about it is.
No offense but I doubt it. You don't seem to have showed much interest on this site.
Dogsmilk wrote:
So you'd like to stop attacks on the Bible and Koran......
Yes.
Dogsmilk wrote:
....but have everyone think the Talmud is inherently evil?
How come Christianity and Islam get this treatment ?(you'll struggle to find something 'evil' in the New Testament. The only bit I can remember is the bit that has often been translated as "you must hate your family", when the meaning is obviously that you must reject your family in preference to rejecting God).
How come the Talmud is a complete non-issue in the public domain. How come it escapes the treatment?....and this a book that says the most dastardly things regarding how Jews can happily abuse 'goys' (that's me, by the way). I don't like it when a 'Holy Book' says it is OK for a Jew to rob, rape or even kill me......and these things it does say......or have I been reading some other book?
Dogsmilk wrote:
......
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. If you have power, you want more. It is likely if you had that power you would behave in the same way, as would I, while convincing yourself you were doing what was best.
At last we agree......if you accept that you and I are the types that would seek out that power in the first place.
We are all corruptible.
However there are people around who have little interest in power and find the thought of directing other people's lives and growing rich in the process....quite repugnant.
......and even most people who start out on the path to power will turn back if they see real wickedness on the way. There was a horrible masonic execution of a senior mason who betrayed a secret back in the late 1800's (I think) The crime was exposed and massive numbers of masons left the organisation.
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 9:13 pm Post subject:
karlos, 'Christ hated Jews...'; 'Jesus was an anti-Jew...'?? They don't seem to have taught you very well in your C of E school.
Jesus was about love, not hate. 'Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do'; not my idea of hate. Jesus' disciples were Jews, his family were Jews, he preached to and healed Jews.
'You can take a horse to the water, but you can't make him drink...'; if many Jews wish to reject the teachings of Jesus, so be it. But that does not mean he will hate them.
The only hate on this thread seems to come from people who wish to blame Zionists, or Jews, for all the woes in Christendom.
Sixy and Dogsmilk, I want you to know that this Christian (and 9/11, 7/7, Pearl Harbour, Gulf of Tonkin, USS Liberty, Reichstag Fire, Bali, Spain, Aldo Moro, Diana, Patrice Lumumba, JFK, Bobby K, JFK Jr, etc ad infinitum 'Truther') does not hate Jews, or Moslems, or Hindus, or Atheists.
And to those who support NK, may I draw their attention to this quote from the Evening Standard (which has appeared on another thread already:
'Dr Kollerstrom was last month stripped of an honorary research fellowship at University College London after it emerged he had written a paper entitled The Auschwitz "Gas Chamber" Illusion on a far-Right website - claiming it was like a holiday camp where inmates sunned themselves by an "elegant" swimming pool and listened to orchestras'
I have told him what I think of that, by email. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
its one of my favourites and always empowers you to do what you feel is right especially when as a truthseekers you are under attack.
