Rachel from N.London on Alex Cox's Forum

[Sinclair]

I have just finished reading the (3-page) topic entitled Sticky: Alex's Xmas Blog: 2005.12.23 - 7/7, located on the forum discussion board at Alex Cox's Forum site, located here - http://www.prayforrain.com/coxforum/viewforum.php?f=1 .

I would recommend to anyone seriously interested in (the deep politics of)the events of 7th July 2005 to have a read of the 3 pages (it is very current stuff, with a large number of posts made today (18/1/06).

What do you really think happened?

Why the determination to discredit what you term 'the official story'?

Any answers?

Can you prove to me specifically that 7/7 was a psy-ops/staged/fake/ operation in any way at all? Can you answer your own questions with any evidence that support your theories?

I would suggest that the (constant) requests by 'official liners' for answers/explanations that support alternative theories are used to find out just who knows what & to plug gaps. What do others think?

I found the link to the Alex Cox Forum site through http://antagonise.blogspot.com, which I'd also recommend checking out.

[insidejob]

Sinclair, let me get this straight.

The security services regard the Internet as a threat. They have their spooks on the net pretending to be ordinary people who are seeking to debunk conspiracy theories.

Rachel from north London could indeed exist. She could wittingly or unwittingly allow spooks to use her name to cause dissent among, waste time of and gain intelligence about 9/11 and 7/7 sceptics. Spooks are having her pose as someone who wants an inquiry to make out that she is not a stooge and fool the sceptics.

I think this is a credible theory.

Furthermore, if you were a criminal spook, you would realise that the survivors could become a problem. Some 9/11 survivors have. So, you would want to cultivate some among the survivors who could operate as an opinion former for the others. You could argue that seems Rachel is playing that role. Also, there is a female relative of a victim who adopts an authoritarian response who is quoted on the media. So, they could control the opinions within two strands of survivor opinion.

There is a dissenter strand represented by survivor John Tullock, a media studies lecturer. If I were them, I'd want to control that strand but I think it is unlikely that John Tullock is in cahoots with them.

I note on the Indymedia site, when 7/7 conspiracy theories first arose, you had bloggers whose main argument was 'conspiracy theorists are nutters'. These interventions seemed designed not to attack conspiracy bloggers but to stop non-committed viewers from seriously engaging with conspiracy theories. That is, they are promoting an emotional response to conspiracy theories rather than a rational one.

Rachel is different. She does want to come up with arguments and thus engage with the rational. That is, she debates some arguments. But she still wants to promote an emotional response to engaging in conspiracy theories. She also has an emotional attachment to the 'mad Muslim fundamentalist threat' idea.

Most interesting is her witness evidence concerning Germaine. This is difficult to either verify or refute but it does tend to undermine any conspiracy theories. But could this be Rachel engaging in disinformation? If so, this would be evidence of her being a secret service asset, whether she realises it or not.

I have to state that she could be behaving in good faith and has no contact direct or indirect with criminal spooks. But nonetheless, what do we do? Her Internet emotional profile has to be challenged. The fact that she can say she is a survivor is going to influence people who could take conspiracy theories seriously. But he promotion of the mad Muslim threat is also problematic. I'm black. I'm offended by the idea that typical African converts to Islam can become suicide bombers because 'they hate the West'. This indirectly implicates me.

(This suicide bombers, death cult stuff is Zionist nonsense. Zionist say there's a suicide death cult in Palestine. They say it's because of religion. And then they says it's global. The reality is that there is popular support for suicide attacks in Palestine. There is no popular support for it in Britain. In Palestine, suicide attacks are a military tactic not a religious duty i.e. targets are so well defended that suicide attacks are the only sure way of success. That is not the case in the UK. As have been said, there was no reason for the 7/7 bombers to commit suicide. The view that the 7/7 four were suicide like in Palestine is propaganda.)

We need to work out a strategy to challenge the widespread, emotional public response to conspiracy theories. Perhaps, one way is use ridicule in the same way they do. The notion that bin Laden was behind 7/7 is a conspiracy theory. We're supposed to believe that Dr Evil from his bat cave managed to fool the security services and got three or four young people who should be more interested in getting their end away to blow themselves to bits because of 'what Western democracy is doing to Muslims around the world'.

Otherwise, if people like Rachel are spooks then it may be useful to find out what their propaganda is.

[Ally]

^^^well said^^^


My tuppence on Rachel is there is more than 1 person behind her writing. I don't know why but I feel like a male wrote much of her stuff on Cox's forum. No proof like, just a hunch.

Good to see Alex Cox has grown some stones considering the silence from almost all other quarters.

I've been writing to Yorkshire Post journalists trying to get them interested but never had a response yet.

[ianrcrane]

Hi Ally,

in response to your attempts to contact the Yorkshire Post. I gave a presentation at The Trades Club in Hebden Bridge last November. At the end of the evening, a member of the audience introduced himself to me as a Senior Reporter on the Yorkshire Post. He stated that he was very interested in the material that I had presented on the three lads from Leeds and that he agreed with pretty much everything that I had said. However, when I asked him why his paper was not running articles questioning the official version or making editorial comment on the subject, he laughed and said that any attempt to print such material would be 'journalistic suicide'!

Best regards,

Ian.

[ian neal]

Rachel from north London could indeed exist. She could wittingly or unwittingly allow spooks to use her name

and

My tuppence on Rachel is there is more than 1 person behind her writing. I don't know why but I feel like a male wrote much of her stuff on Cox's forum. No proof like, just a hunch.

Hi good people

As I say here I have followed Rachel's postings on u75 boards. She is a real person as demonstrated by her meeting with several of the regular posters on u75. My advice is unless you can prove she is a spook (nigh impossible) I would steer clear of suggesting as much on public bulletin boards. Such musings could be portrayed as callous smeering against an innocent victim etc. and will antagonise undecided readers who will dismiss such speculation as insensitive.

My advise is (1) consider using the private section of these boards to link together 7/7 campaigners to discuss 'strategy'/ideas in private (JR can help you do so) and (2) focus the argument on what should be the ToR of any inquiry and it should consider the possibility of MI6 involvement as suggested by John Loftus and Michael Meacher. It is important to plant the seed that MI5 and MI6 have previous when it comes to working with terrorists

Hope this helpful

[ian neal]

We need to work out a strategy to challenge the widespread, emotional public response to conspiracy theories. Perhaps, one way is use ridicule in the same way they do.

true

how about reworking something like this but reverse it so that it is 10 common characteristics of a conspiracy denier

[Garrett Cooke]

No doubt we are all aware of Holmgren's (IMO brilliant): http://www.serendipity.li/wot/holmgren01.htm. A piece in a similar style could be written to describe the absurdity of supposing that the 77 bombings should be attributed to four suicide bombers from Leeds. I will have a try!

Garrett

[insidejob]

Having thought about it, I agree with Ian and it’s not a good idea to accuse Rachel of any underhand behaviour. As far as I am aware, she has done and said nothing that a person involved in and concerned about 7/7 would not have. Her dismissiveness about conspiracy theories reflects what probably is the dominant view in the UK. Such a view would be dominant among the Left. I don’t want to suggest that spooks aren’t involved in alternative sites but they don’t need to use Rachel.

Rachel also has considerations that the rest of us do not. She is high profile. She is, I believe, aware that if she starts promoting conspiracy theories, something bad might happen to her. This is ironic. This probably reflects widespread fears. One reason members of the public don’t want to get into conspiracy theories is because if they do the conspirators will get them. They know that there are powerful people who will abuse their power, get away with it and act in secret with criminal and malicious intent. Ordinary people like them would be crushed if they get in their way. It is remarkable the extent to which fear controls people’s thoughts and behaviour.

As for Rachel, if we are to counter her possible anti-conspiracy influence, then it would be to encourage her to engage with it on a rational basis. She does engage with 7/7 anomalies. She may come up with valid criticisms of conspiracy theories. We don’t need her to agree with them. She may be as irritating as she regards us, but she is doing it in good faith. (I hope.)

insidejob

[Pikey]

Ian Crane stated

However, when I asked him why his paper was not running articles questioning the official version or making editorial comment on the subject, he laughed and said that any attempt to print such material would be 'journalistic suicide'

David Icke in his excellent book "Children of the Matrix" refers to newspaper editors as "intellectual prostitutes". Your statement Ian concurs with this!

When it comes to engaging the politicians and media to the truth of 911 I am afraid the truth and reality is that the 911 truth campaign is hitting a brick wall!

What strategy can our movement employ to penetrate this brick wall?

Peace & truth

[ian neal]

Rachel is quoted here

This weekend Rachel North, an advertising executive from north London who was injured in the King’s Cross bombing, said: “This is a compelling reason why we need a full public inquiry. The public has a right to know what the risks were and why this happened.” in this article

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... _2,00.html

I think we would support her in that

[paul wright]

Rachel is quoted here

This weekend Rachel North, an advertising executive from north London who was injured in the King’s Cross bombing, said: “This is a compelling reason why we need a full public inquiry. The public has a right to know what the risks were and why this happened.” in this article

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... _2,00.html

I think we would support her in that

Yes Ian
Whatever her perceptions about the true nature of the 7/7 attack Rachel should be supported in wanting a full and open public inquiry
The trouble is, and this needs to be addressed to Rachel, how to maintain independence
Government-appointed inquiries are not independent as seen from Hutton and Butler
There can be no government-initated public inquiry expected to exhume the truth no matter how much info they put on the internet
No government inquiry is going to pose questions to Peter Power, and to judge from the 9/11 commission would hardly even acknowledge that information
Perhaps someone like Keith Mothersson should start to organise some legal team,a member of one of the alleged perpetrators' family. Rachel and other'victims' and lets try and contact emergency workers and transport workers with tales to tell
A truly idependent inquiry would be nice

[alkmyst]

During a few days of exchanges on the Alex Cox Forum earlier this month, 'Rachel North' submitted some interesting postings before electing to remove the evidence of her participation and deleted all of her posts.

A number of forum members had endeavoured to engage 'Rachel North' in discussion but any rational observation, comment or question which suggested that there may be some anomolies between what has been portrayed in the MSM and the masses of accumulating evidence, was met with zero intellectual curiosity.

Earlier todayThe Alex Cox Forum was hacked and is currently off-line!

Entirely co-incidental, no doubt!

Al K Myst.

[ian neal]

Hi dh

You're right. The key question for any campaign for a 7/7 inquiry is its terms of reference, independence and transparency and whether it even considers the possibility of 'intelligence failure', 'prior knowledge' and the possibility of involvement of rogue elements from within HMG

The reason I picked up on Rachel's comments regarding the Times article is that she was calling for an inquiry based upon the proposition that HMG intelligence services may have had prior relevent knowledge of the 'bombers'. This is a shift as far as I can tell from her previous calls for the inquiry to focus more on the response of the authorities to the bombings, based on her assumption that the details of the crime are already known.

[Jane]

I have to state that she could be behaving in good faith and has no contact direct or indirect with criminal spooks. But nonetheless, what do we do? Her Internet emotional profile has to be challenged. The fact that she can say she is a survivor is going to influence people who could take conspiracy theories seriously. But he promotion of the mad Muslim threat is also problematic. I'm black. I'm offended by the idea that typical African converts to Islam can become suicide bombers because 'they hate the West'. This indirectly implicates me.

You do right to be offended by the idea being promoted that "typical African converts to Islam can become suicide bombers" Insidejob!

There is certainly a very racist element in all this. I was just wondering why I have not been hearing any more about Gary Holness who lost a leg in the 7/7 incident and has been on TV AM a few times. I remember telling people how impressed I was with his positive and forgiving attitude. I was told that you could "never forgive" people who do things like this (actually, they would have been even more confused if I had said "So we can never forgive MI5 and ourselves for allowing them to do these things without us "noticing?!" As most people didn't seem to "notice" what has been going on in Iraq (nor will they notice when it happens in Iran - as Christopher Eccleston said when playing Dr Who -"You humans, you just eat your chips and watch tv, whilst all the while there is a war going on under your feet!"). They do seem to sit up and take "notice" when middle class white people get killed (sorry, I seem to be sounding like Sir Ian Blair here!!!).
But look at this I have just found in looking up about Gary Holness:

http://uk.altermedia.info/multicultural ... s_442.html

And look where I found it!

I don't suppose we will see Gary on TV AM again! Why? Could they not be "big enough" to have him on again and say "Well, it appears you did something wrong in the past which no doubt you now regret and which you felt you had to lie about because you realised how the media would respond - exactly as they have responded now, but like you have been ready to forgive (the bombers - things are sort of going on various levels here!) then we should also be able to forgive you...

I think it is because people don't want to face up to the fact that in so many ways "we are all guilty" and prefer to project all the "evil things" that go on -onto others - and the more "other" the better that they find it so hard to accept "Conspiracy" theories. Anyone seen the film "Conspiracy"? I haven't yet but my boss told me about it - about how it is a film about the Nazis calmly planning how many Jews they can kill in the gas ovens whilst they have a "meeting" at some posh villa by a lake with sumptious refreshments. There are the "little people" there taking the minutes, etc who at first start to question what is going on when they realise what is being planned - but then they shut up and get on with their minutes ....I was only obeying orders, Sir! I had a family to look after, I needed the money ....it was those evil Nazis what done it ...no one else ever "noticed" what they were up to!

They don't want to face up to the conspiracy because when you do see it you have to realise that in truth we have all been a part of it or we would not be here now!

My thoughts anyway!

[ian neal]

We are all individually responsible for our actions and should be accountable for them including war criminals like Bush Blair and Hitler. The level of awareness of the 9/11 truth movement and the existence of DVDs that prove, in the eyes of many people, that the Bush regime is responsible for 9/11 is still v low amongst the British public in my experience. But that awareness is rising. I retain unshakeable faith in the human spirit and the belief that when the evidence contained in, for example Loose Change or DRGriffin's books, is known to by many and not just a few, it will set off an unstopable chain reaction that will transform the world. A global people power movement of peace and justice. The beauty of 9/11 is that the evidence is out there, it's accessable and it's compelling. If the evidence leads you to conclude that the Bush regime is responsible, there can be no avoiding the depth and seriousness of the situation. I refuse to believe that if for example Loose Change was screened at prime time on BBC1, this country would wake up, shrug its shoulders and continue 'business as usual'.

Now given the media bias that exists against the 9/11 truth movement I'm open to the question of how we spread the word and how we link our message with others working for peace and justice and how we make 9/11 truth part of a global transformation movement, but the basic premis that this transformation is possible even inevitable, I don't doubt

[Jane]

We are all individually responsible for our actions and should be accountable for them including war criminals like Bush and Hitler

Yes, quite true, dear Ian .... but I don't think the majority of people around us can accept this at the moment....it's hard enough beginning to accept it oneself.... Then we have to attempt to deal with the others, without judging or feeling superior, kind of like, (I think) trying to deal with one's own wounds, then getting up and attempting to help the rest of the wounded....who will not even accept they are wounded!

[ian neal]

it's hard enough beginning to accept it oneself.... Then we have to attempt to deal with the others, without judging or feeling superior, kind of like, (I think) trying to deal with one's own wounds, then getting up and attempting to help the rest of the wounded....who will not even accept they are wounded!

You're right to think about how people are feeling and the psychology of it all. The sheer magnitude of the deception and implications of 9/11 truth are powerful reasons that prevent people (1) considering even looking into 9/11 and (2) then accepting its full implications. That's the beauty of 'the big lie'. If you are a credible and influential public figure how do you ask the truly awkward questions without implying by your questions the full magnitude and implications of the implied accusation and not be labelled a conspiracy theorist, that most irrational of beings? There is an undoubted genius in the madness of the PTB

[Ally]

Rachel is a total shill. I noticed Cox's forum has been under malicious attack since she abused everyone then deleted all her posts from there.
The nonsense she writes on her blog makes me want to puke, it sounds straight from tavistock.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4655196.stm

[Prole]

On the Alex Cox Forum, Rachel engaged in the debate over the Piccadilly Line train number which was originally quoted as 311 before being changed to 331. I grabbed her comment before she managed to delete it:

There is indeed confusion about the number of the train. Tom and Ray think it was train 311 and have said so. TFL say it is 331. There was however one train, not two that was bombed. How do I know? Because every single passenger that has joined KCU has similar accounts and not one person reports being on an eastbound Piccadilly line train. If the call was going out through my writing for ‘’ were you on the bombed Piccadilly line train?’’ and there were TWO – people would be reporting different stories. And not only that, but by now someone would have said, hang on, I was going Russell Square to KX – not the other way round – and I was bombed too. Not a squeak. One train. Two number, much confusion, so why is this?

TFL are getting back to me, the driver and the station manager all think 311 – but the re was widespread confusion about the trains as many of them were taken out of service due to the fire at Cali Road. So is it confusion? Very likely, and I will report more as I hear back on my blog.

Rachel is being disingenuous in her reply as no-one has suggested that the second train was going the other way.

I contacted her through her blog and this was the exchange:

Rachel
can I ask, which bombed train? Have TFL got back to you yet re: train 311 or 331? Just to remind you that on the Alex Cox forum (which has been hacked btw) you wrote that you would post TFL's answer to your query here on your blog.
Thanks

Rachel said...

The group is for anyone on the bombed Piccadilly line train that was travelling from Kings Cross to Russell Square. We know who we are. Only one train was bombed on the Piccadilly line. There is currently some confusion regarding its number. I have had clarification about the number of the train but I have not entered into further correspondence about the number of the train nor am I going to post further details here because that will draw me back into endless conversations with people who think there were 2 trains, and I am sick of doing that. Doing so is more trouble than it is worth and has led to nasty comments being left ... on the internet which I find disturbing.

We can only assume that TFL have told Rachel that the train number was 331, whcih she has strangely accepted.
http://rachelnorthlondon.blogspot.com/2 ... -blog.html

[alkmyst]

Rachel North Blog - Feb 10, 2006

There will always be those who tell us not to ask questions, of ourselves or each other. Who say they, and only they, speak the truth, the only truth.

This quote may cause some amusement to those who endeavoured to engage 'Team Rachel' in rational debate on the Alex Cox forum a few weeks ago. Unfortunately, 'Team Rachel' felt the need to delete all of their postings after being quizzed on the contradictions in their account(s) of the 7/7 events.

Even with Rachel's postings deleted, the other postings make for some very interesting reading; especially as many of the responses quote some of Rachel's contradictions and highlight the aggressive stance that she was taking toward any 'conspiraloon' who dared question the official version of events.

But hang on a second .......... Rachel has just discovered that the London Assembly have established a July 7th Review Committee ....... but they didn't tell her about it and she wants to ask some questions ...... well hey, guess what Rachel, so do we!! There is however one very significant problem...... which is that the questions that we would like to ask have been conveniently excluded from the 'Terms of Reference' of the Review Committee!

www.london.gov.uk/assembly/scrutiny/7ju ... ntacts.jsp

However, what is interesting is that the aspects of July 7th that the Review Committe are investigating are exactly the issues that Peter Power said that his organisation were addressing when they,"......went from slow time thinking to quick time thinking......"

Do you think that Peter Power will be asked to present his experiences to the Review Committee? If not, why not? After all, he is the Preferred Supplier to H.M. Government for crisis management!

From Visor Consultants website:

Visor Consultants have been able to support many domestic and global organisations to prevent chaos in a crisis and increase their overall resilience. Our clients include one of the top seven companies in the USA and key Departments of the UK Government.

From Rachel North Blog - Feb 14, 2006

London Assembly 7th July Review Committee
Right. Kings Cross United is a non-political group for survivors and first responders and anyone who was directly caught up in the hell of the Piccadilly line bombed train ( i.e: saw things they won't forget) . We're almost 100 people now - mostly survivors, plus both drivers, two police officers, and LU staff.

Some of us still have questions and comments and and thoughts and feedback about the events of 7th July to share. Some of us have said that we want an independent, transparent Public Enquiry to try answer those questions. Some of us are feeling quite political and pissed off, as individuals about the lack of answers concernign events of July 7th and after.
Yeah, we know. No enquiry is to be held, says the Home Secretary, despite victims' anger. But the questions aren't going away. And when the next bomb goes off, we who went through it last time have some feedback that might be useful. It has been very frustrating. Even if the Government are too scared to face up to the fact that their foreign policy and support of Bush are instrumental in hardening Muslim extremism and raised the likelihood of further terror attacks in the UK, as the Joint Intelligence Committee warned Blair before the Iraq invasion, you'd think that there would be some interest in hearing from survivors, because there are useful learnings that can be shared. Well, now it seems Tessa Jowell may even be listening...

Once again, though, survivors are finding out all this stuff by themselves.I have been in contact with a man from the Edgware Road survivor group, and he let me know about the London Assembly and something called the London Assembly 7th July Review Committee. I had never heard of it. (It apparently came out of the London Resilience Committee, set up I think by the Mayor of London. It has been in operation for some months.) The Edgware Road man has suggested that his survivor group and KCU meet up to discuss issues and raise them at the meeting in March - a good idea I think and I am about to forward his message to the group.

(RANT: But why have we heard nothing about this Committee? I'm in contact with almost 100 survivors and people directly involved and nobody has heard anything - not a sausage! And given that what seems journalists and people from all over the world have managed to find out about KCU and make contact via this blog I am really surpised that nobody at the London Assembly or the DCMS thought to google'' 7/7 survivors'' and get in touch with any of us. Or get in touch with the Government-funded victim resource centre, the 7th July Assistance centre and ask them to tell victims. I wonder how the Edgware Rd group found out about it? Surfing the GLA website by chance?)

Anyway. I called the London Assembly to find out about this Committee and the planned special 'scrutiny' meetings - I understand there is to be one for bereaved 23rd March 10am -1pm, and one for survivors 27th march, 10am - 1pm. The scrutiny meetings are normally public, with press present. However, in this instance I understand survivors and bereaved unwilling to be in the spotlight can have private meetings and submit written documents for consideration with their feedback, thoughts and suggestions beforehand if they want. (Here's some info on 'Scrutiny Meetings'.)

I got quite excited at this point. Could this 'Scrutiny Meeting' be a sort of poor relation of the Independent Public Enquiry I and others have been badgering for? Could it be a start, at least, to answering the July 7th questions that still haunt victims?

The 7th July Review Committee, I have been informed by Dale Longford at the GLA who has an organising role, was set up to look at the 'lessons learned' following July 7th events, with 'particular focus on communications' . I was told by Dale that ''24 hours after the Government announced that there was to be no Public Enquiry'', approaches were made to the Committee'' to set up something. And, yes, they ''are in contact with the Department of Culture Media and Sport.''

Hmmm, I thought.

The DCMS are now funding the 7th July Assistance Centre, ( resource for victims/bereaved/affected by July 7th) but when I phoned the July 7th Assistance Centre up about it they had only heard about the meeting last week. Communication is not a strong point of the DCMS from what I have experienced over the last seven months.

(ANOTHER RANT: It is all so bloody infuriating - if you want to have some sort of enquiry into the events of 7th July, and communication thereafter, particularly with feedback from those involved, it kind of helps if you do some flipping communicating with the victims and survivors. Still, the 7th July Assistance Centre DO know about it now, and details of the planned meeting is to be circulated in a newsletter to victims and bereaved 'soon'. Which is hopeful. However...

There have been lots of problems reported with KCU members in terms of not getting sent info and being put on DCMS lists and then coming off lists again, and data being lost and invites to the Memorial Service and other events being chased and chased...I've ended up doing a lot of chasing and finding out myself and sharing info with the group about everything from Memorial service tickets to HPA Assessment, and I have a day job and a social life and I am obviously not being paid to do all this whereas the 7th July Assistance centre has Government funding.
So I am a bit twitchy about relying on the 7th July Assistance Centre and the DCMS for information on this sort of thing ( though to be fair they seem to have got a lot better recently

The irony of a meeting about communication problems on July 7th and after, with particular interest in the communications to survivors being set up, and the people the Government have put in charge of commuinicating to the survivors are unable to do so because they don't flipping well know about it is not lost on me!).

Anyway. I am told that the Committee has invited people to give their views on lessons learned since 7/7/2005 and to provide said views in writing or at informal meetings or on the days set - and that survivors are especially invited to the meeting on 27th March, from 10am - 1pm bereaved on 23rd March 10am -1pm - and that the focus of these meetings is to be communication - obviously on the day, but also with ''authority figures'' after 7th July ( for want of a better term - police, family liason officers, 7th July Assistance centre, etc).

So at least we can raise our concerns about the communications frustrations we have faced since the bomb exploded, and maybe some good will come out of it. Something helpful for the next survivors and families when the next bomb goes off.

From the website

''Whatever role you play in the life of the capital, the story of your experiences on the day is important to us.
Were you kept informed of what was happening? Were you stuck at work? What about your children, family, loved ones and friends? Were you directly affected and if so did you get the information you needed? What impressed you and what didn't? Importantly, where did you get information from?
It is the events and how they affected your day that matter to us, not your views on the causes and solutions to international terrorism, *they will be edited out of this record. Also, we would like to emphasise that we are focusing on what happened on 7 July, rather than the investigation that took place in the weeks that followed.

*Boo hiss.

Well, at least it is a start...

I bet all the conspiraloons turn up now. Well, at least they'll be able to see that I am real, not a ''Government disinfo shill''. For I shall be there. Oh yes.

I would really like to avoid disappointing Rachel, so I hope that some of my London based colleagues on the 'Quest for Truth' will join me in attending the future sessions of the July 7th Review Committee. Those residing away from the smoke but who wish to pass comment to the Review Committee, please check out the Review Committee website:

www.london.gov.uk/assembly/scrutiny/resil_views.jsp

By the way, just after 'Team Rachel' had deleted all their postings on the Alex Cox Forum, the site was hacked. Although it was restored briefly, it has been hacked again. It would seem that someone would like to ensure that the evidence of the exchange is removed .....even with Rachel's postings deleted! However, anyone who would like to receive a copy of the exchanges, please contact me either by Email or Private Message.

The truth is always stranger than fiction!

Al K Myst

[Prole]

The Alex Cox forum is back up and running and includes Rachel's last comment to a post I made re: train numbers.
Alex responded to her and then the forum was hacked!
http://prayforrain.com/coxforum/viewtop ... 3&start=60

[alkmyst]

Alex Cox Forum is up and running with some interesting postings from Rachel North:

www.prayforrain.com/coxforum/viewtopic. ... c&start=75

Shortly before the Alex Cox forum was hacked, Rachel North deleted all her previous postings and stated that she would no longer engage the 'conspiraloons'. Well, it seem that 'Team Rachel' just couldn't stay away!

Al K Myst

[Ally]

Well, it seem that 'Team Rachel' just couldn't stay away!

Based on the events of July 7th, I remember the author Mimi wanted me to let her use my blog for it when she was writing it but at the time I was sick of people asking me to reproduce the blog and I said no.

http://rachelnorthlondon.blogspot.com/2 ... yself.html

[Prole]

I have just posted the following on the Alex Cox forum:

Alkymst said to Rachel

Surely you're not suggesting that just because Channel 4 made a feeble attempt to take Peter Power out of the loop, we should accept everything that is reported on the 'Tell-A-Vision' at face value?

Rachel knows how the media gets it 'wrong' as she contacted the 'authorities' after it was stated that the bomb was by the first set of doors on the first carriage of the Piccadilly Line train.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/u ... ell_sq.stm

The following exchange took place on the urban 75 forum where Rachel posts as Badger Kitten:

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/archiv ... 9-p-8.html

Badger Kitten
08-07-2005, 04:38 PM
I am hearing on the news that the bombs were on carriage one by the first set of doors.
This is not true. That is where I was. The explosion was behind me. These reports are wrong.

Badger Kitten
08-07-2005, 04:42 PM

You should report this information badger.

I have. I just spent half an hour talking to the Crimial Investigation line. I've tried the BBC newsdesk, the Surivir/Missing Person line and eventually I got through to the right people.

I am worried that people are trying to dig out bodies and they are approaching the wrong end of the train, they should approach it via Russell Square, not via Kings X. We escaped at the front, the bomb was behind us. That is the way they need to go in to get the bodies out

Badger Kitten
08-07-2005, 04:53 PM

When you say behind you, was it in the carriage behind you or could it have been a couple behind? If it was the carriage directly behind you then my theory is pants.

The explosion was so loud I can't tell if it was several carriages behind or the next one behind. It felt like being punched in the ears. All I know is I walked forward, escaped out the drivers hatch, it was unbelievably crowded, we escaped from the front and there was no bomb to my immediate left or right or in front of me. And I was in the middle by the door, and I fell to the left, by the doors. Then I got up and left by going straight head and out front. And the tunnel was intact.

Badger Kitten
10-07-2005, 03:50 AM

After detailed anti-terrorism staff interview I found out some stuff I needed to share.

The King X bomb was placed at the END of the first carriage, not the first set of doors on the front carriage as reprted on the news.

The tube tunnel was very narrow here, and the train was very crowded, which was why most of the people were killed and hurt at the back of carriage 1/ beginning of carriage 2.

I heard this from the counter-terrorism police who took my statement today: the BBC and ITN were wrong in their first reports.

From being there about 7-10 yards from blast, I can say that there were about 30- 50 behind me therefore who may not have got out alive. About 10 behind me walked to safety.

Perhaps Rachel is drawn back to these discussions because neither the official story nor hers adds up.

[Sinclair]

Prole,

Excellent posts by you & Alkmyst on the AlexCox forum.

The whole circumstances of (Team) Rachel's posts on there, togther with the subsequent deletion & the consequent hacking of the site (twice) is VERY interesting. I wouldn't be surprised if that forum goes down again!

I’d like to draw attention to the posting by Alkmyst above (Wed Feb 15, 2006 12:25 am) & on the AlexCox forum here , particularly the suggested questions to Mr Peter Power.


___________________________________
Our Karma Just Ran Over Your Dogma

[Rachel]

Having thought about it, I agree with Ian and it’s not a good idea to accuse Rachel of any underhand behaviour. As far as I am aware, she has done and said nothing that a person involved in and concerned about 7/7 would not have. Her dismissiveness about conspiracy theories reflects what probably is the dominant view in the UK. Such a view would be dominant among the Left. I don’t want to suggest that spooks aren’t involved in alternative sites but they don’t need to use Rachel.

Rachel also has considerations that the rest of us do not. She is high profile. She is, I believe, aware that if she starts promoting conspiracy theories, something bad might happen to her. This is ironic. This probably reflects widespread fears. One reason members of the public don’t want to get into conspiracy theories is because if they do the conspirators will get them. They know that there are powerful people who will abuse their power, get away with it and act in secret with criminal and malicious intent. Ordinary people like them would be crushed if they get in their way. It is remarkable the extent to which fear controls people’s thoughts and behaviour.

As for Rachel, if we are to counter her possible anti-conspiracy influence, then it would be to encourage her to engage with it on a rational basis. She does engage with 7/7 anomalies. She may come up with valid criticisms of conspiracy theories. We don’t need her to agree with them. She may be as irritating as she regards us, but she is doing it in good faith. (I hope.)

insidejob

Thanks, on that basis I am willing to engage. Please refrain from personal insults.

[Rachel]

Rachel is quoted here

This weekend Rachel North, an advertising executive from north London who was injured in the King’s Cross bombing, said: “This is a compelling reason why we need a full public inquiry. The public has a right to know what the risks were and why this happened.” in this article

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... _2,00.html

I think we would support her in that

Thank you for your support. As some of you may know there is to be 2 further meeting sof the 7th July Review Committee with witness from bereaved and survivirs. I and other survivors will be attending and giving witness.

We are able to do this in 3 ways: and we can do it anonymously or give our full name.

We can write a report of what happened to us on the day and after.
We can give additional personal testimony and recommendations in person either to the Committee in private or in public at the meeting where the public and the media will be present. There are 200 places for the public to attend, and priority will be given to survivors/bereaved who wish to attend.

The London Assembly is there to hold the Mayor of London to account; the 7th July Review Committee is comprised of a cross party group of MPS who are independent of the Government. They will compile a report comrising all the testimony from those who have contributed to the meetings, which so far have included representatives of the police, emergency services and communications providers involved on the day.
The report they produce in May contains transcripts of all interviews, and panel meetings. The meetings that have already happened have their minutes and transcripts available to read online.

http://www.london.gov.uk/assembly/resilience/index.jsp

I and other survivors have already found out about the planned meeting where we can give our testimony and recommendations and we are to recieve information shortly in the post. It is important to me and others that we have this chance to speak out and whilst it is not a Public Enquiry in the normal sense of the word, it is nonetheless an opportunity to give testimony in public, have it on record and for voices to be heard and learnings shared.

The report & recommendations from the Review Committee will be scrutinised and responded to by the Cabinet, as well as the media, the public and the police and emergency services and those involved on the day for example the phone companies.

Non-survivors can also offer their views here http://www.london.gov.uk/assembly/scrut ... _views.jsp

[Rachel]

During a few days of exchanges on the Alex Cox Forum earlier this month, 'Rachel North' submitted some interesting postings before electing to remove the evidence of her participation and deleted all of her posts.

A number of forum members had endeavoured to engage 'Rachel North' in discussion but any rational observation, comment or question which suggested that there may be some anomolies between what has been portrayed in the MSM and the masses of accumulating evidence, was met with zero intellectual curiosity.

Earlier todayThe Alex Cox Forum was hacked and is currently off-line!

Entirely co-incidental, no doubt!

Al K Myst.

Going through all points raised...

I deleted the posts because I was sick of the personal insults and didn't see the point in engageing. I have since tried again.

Personal insults included this sort of thing

chavez wrote:
Rachel is 100% COINTELPRO
No evidence to support her claims.

commanderson wrote:
my my, nerves do get fraught, in the realm of information dispersal and disposal, wherein rachaels task lies, to dilute and distract from folks openly sharing pertinent information. I must entirely agree with chavez that rachael seems to have far too much time on her hands to be re-educating us poor deluded conspiracy theorists, evangelising for just an acceptance that it was ofcource those angry arabs, rather than an investagation of the facts. As she laments over the terrible mauling metered out by the savage wingnuts on a poor bombing victim, you can even hear the splash of crocidle tears. Maybe she is a lizard?

chavez wrote:

Stop bloody lying Rachel and show us some proof please.
Typical disinfo shill, all BS and no evidence.

Don't expect Rachel to ask any real questions or provide evidence to support her emotive BS. She is using the skeptics to help police fill holes in their fictional account of 7/7 which frames a bunch of innocent guys from Leeds. There is NO PROOF WHATSOEVER they were even in London on 7/7 regardless of whatever emotion or insult Rachel uses to shroud the truth.

How much you getting paid to troll the Internet everyday lying to everyone Rachel? You seem to have a lot of time on your hands to write these lengthy replies at all times of the day. Wouldn't be suprised if your IP traces back to GCHQ.

alwun wrote:
Rachel(rachel smachel), it's your tone of voice that is the giveaway. You also seem to think that having been involved directly in the events of the day(were you really?) confers upon you some special status and insight, but all it seems to have done is open the floodgates of hysteria. I would recommend that you stay off line for a year or two and cease taking up space on the few sites where sensible folks are beginning to communicate about the real terror of the ongoing situation that Brits are facing today. ?..


chavez wrote:
It should be clear from Rachel's disinfo tactics she's part of the same lying media and police who set up this scam.

Bet it ain't even female.

This was frustrating and I judged further participation somewhat pointless.

However, I disagree with the OP on this point

any rational observation, comment or question which suggested that there may be some anomolies between what has been portrayed in the MSM and the masses of accumulating evidence, was met with zero intellectual curiosity

.


Not true. I rather wish I hadn't deleted my posts, as then I could point you to the fact that what I did was express an opinion that many people were focussing on small details and making conspiracy mountains out of them, that reporting a disaster with multiple sources is always going to throw up some human error and reporting mistakes and that other things that were being focussed on such as the Visor conspiracy have been comprehensively debunked, notably by a Channel 4 News reporter. In fact there is a difference between investigative repoirting and reporting news on the hoof and to conflate the fact that 'mistakes & inaccuracies are sometimes made in the early stages of reporting a major story from multiple locations and sources ' with ' C4 sometimes get things wrong so their debunking of the Visor conspiracy story is wrong ' is foolish.


It is entirely coincidental that Cox's forum has been hacked, I am not a hacker, and have no idea how to do such a thing, nor would I want to.

[Rachel]

Rachel is a total shill. I noticed Cox's forum has been under malicious attack since she abused everyone then deleted all her posts from there.
The nonsense she writes on her blog makes me want to puke, it sounds straight from tavistock.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4655196.stm

NOTE: I am not going to engage with people who can't accept that I am a real person; it is pointless even trying.

[Rachel]

I have to state that she could be behaving in good faith and has no contact direct or indirect with criminal spooks. But nonetheless, what do we do? Her Internet emotional profile has to be challenged. The fact that she can say she is a survivor is going to influence people who could take conspiracy theories seriously. But he promotion of the mad Muslim threat is also problematic. I'm black. I'm offended by the idea that typical African converts to Islam can become suicide bombers because 'they hate the West'. This indirectly implicates me.

You do right to be offended by the idea being promoted that "typical African converts to Islam can become suicide bombers" Insidejob!

There is certainly a very racist element in all this. I was just wondering why I have not been hearing any more about Gary Holness who lost a leg in the 7/7 incident and has been on TV AM a few times. I remember telling people how impressed I was with his positive and forgiving attitude. I was told that you could "never forgive" people who do things like this ..! ( snip! because I want to counter one main point

Not sure if this is implying I am racist but I have written about Garri Holness on my blog and in the Sunday Times. My blog is unavailable at the moment ( I am not assuming it has been hacked though, not that I woudl be able to tell!) but here is the piece in the Sunday Times which I hope may answer insidejob's/Jane's anxieties whether I am a racist... ( see page 3 of the article)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... _3,00.html

The rest of the article is here
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... _1,00.html

By the way, Rachel is my real name but 'North' is not; as a rape survivor I am legally entitled to anonymity and I use it, as it protects me to a certain extent from media interest, and enables me to do my day job without getting calls all the time. Many survivors continue to be the subject of intense media interest, when the survivor group I helped to found realised it needed a media strategy to manage the intense interest in us and to reach out to other survivors and let them know we existed, I became media spokeswoman for 4 reasons: one, my job in advertising had given me some training , two, I am a writer and can write people's stories should they prefer not to talk to a journalist but want to speak out - thus I can give them copy approval and anonymity - three, I was very close to the bomb so sould understand , four, once I had outed myself about surviving my rape ( which the media were onto anyway, as the Garri Holness story was big news) I have this legal right to anonymity which helped in turn to protect me.

For the record, KCU is open ot anyone on the Piccadilly line train, whatever their background, ethnicity, age or whatever. It contains black, white, Asian, Christian, Jewish, Hindu and Muslim and athesist members - a cross section of people who use the London Underground in fact