Cox Forum

Site Admin Joined: 16 Sep 2005 Posts: 17

7/7 - OUR 9/11?

Last week I reviewed three books about the 9/11 atrocities. Two of them suggested that the US Government let these events happen - or organised them - so as to have a pretext to seize the oil assets of the Middle East. One of them, by Webster Tarpley, claimed that terrorist conspiracies are invariably infiltrated by governments, and that terrorist acts or usually the work of government provocateurs seeking a clamp-down. He provides numerous examples of this.

Whenever I go on a peace march, or a march of almost any kind, there are always people handing out flyers. On the Peace March in London on 24 Sept, I was acquired a number of flyers - supposedly from dissenting Muslim or leftist groups - which claimed the 7/7 bombings in London were a secret government act.

So I'd like to briefly apply the same scepticism to the 7/7 events as American writers have done regarding 9/11.

One of the flyers, printed on pink paper - "7-7 - Case for the Defence" (www.julyseventh.co.uk) claims that a 'terror drill' was taking place for bomb attacks at the same times and locations as explosions. This was definitely the case on 9/11 and it would be interesting to know if the claim is (even partially) true in the case of London. Advance knowledge of a training exercise would be presumably be useful to terrorists. But, as Mr Blair and Mr Clarke reminded us last week, there is no need for an official enquiry.

Another flyer, on white paper, "7/7 - There Were No Suicide Bombers" (www.prisonplanet.com/archives/london.htm) makes the same claim, but also supports it, with the following quote:

At half past nine this morning we were actually running an
exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London
based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the
railway stations where it happened this morning.

This is attributed to Peter Power, Managing Director of Visor Consultants and longtime associate of Sir Ian Blair, on BBC Radio 5, 2005/7/7. (There is much more about Power, Visor Consultants, and the 7/7 exercises on both websites. Apparently, the 7/7 "terror drill" tale is true.)

Both flyers, pink and white, refer to mainstream news reports of bomb explosions underneath the trains. Bruce Lait, a passenger on the Aldgate East train, and several passengers on the Edgeware Road train apparently reported this to the Cambridge Evening News and to the Guardian Online (both cite the website www.officialconfusion.com with the instruction 'click on Honigsbaum Audio.')

Both leaflets also claim that CCTV photos of the four suicide bombers outside Luton station were faked. The white leaflet also claims that one Haroon Aswat, the alleged 'mastermind of the failed 21/7 bombings' is an MI6 agent (citing Fox News Channel, 2005/7/29)

The pink leaflet has not much more info than the white one, though there are certainly some other bits of conspiracy stuff left dangling, such as:

7 ) WHY the power surge story, WHY was it changed,
WHY were Kings X workers told to come in early and
not talk to the press, and WHY to the authorities
still withhold the 3 Kings Cross tube departure times?

8 ) Many anomalies also surround the 30 bus which
exploded outside the BMA (Lancet article connection?)
Only bus diverted that morning, it had a poster with
'Absolute Terror - Bold and Brilliant' on its side, etc.

On page two of the pink leaflet we are directed to the CIA and the global scope of things ("The two SAS reconnaissance men arrested in Basra almost certainly had bombs in their car"), and - whoa! - we're advised, for further study (sic) to read Webster Tarpley's book 9/11 - SYTHETIC TERRORISM and another book also recommended by Tarpley and LaRouche's "research agency."

Is one of these two leaflets put out by the Lyndon LaRouche org? It may be so. Perhaps many strange orgs latch onto disasters with parapolitcal overtones, and publish conspiracy books, and hand out leaflets.

LaRouche's dodgy politics might discredit the pink leaflet. But does the pink leaflet therefore discredit the white one?

Not necessarily. In the United States, there are three theories about the 9/11 atrocities: ACCIDENT, LIHOP, and MIHOP is what I think they are called. ACCIDENT is the official theory, the one promoted by the White House, the major media, and the Kean Commision: Bin Laden did it, we were unaware and unprepared. LIHOP is Let It Happen On Purpose: bad people within the US Government reduced America's security deliberately, so that Bin Laden's wicked but useful provocation could go ahead. Bin Laden doesn't feature much in MIHOP - Make It Happen On Purpose - where he is reduced to a minor patsy, like Lee Harvey Oswald' s landlady. MIHOP theorists believe elements within the US gov/mil/biz complex did it all.

ACCIDENT is the theory which the British state and media have applied to 7/7. We've heard little about the simultaneous 'terror exercises.' Links between the alleged suicide bombers and Al Qaeda have been simply assumed; links between them and the security services have not been seriously pursued. Yet there were such contacts. All this is updated, via the two websites, and their links.

A particularly interesting link is to the blog of The Antagonist, who has clearly devoted a lot of thought and analysis to 7/7. He cites early reports - including an announcement by MetroNet, and a subsequent press release - that a catastrophic power surge had caused the three Tube explosions. This leads to speculation that the 'Al Qaeda' story is but a cover-up by MetroNet and the Blair government to avoid a massive corporate manslaughter rap - http://antagonise.blogspot.com/2005/08/london-77-lest-we-forget.html

Surely, from a terrorist's viewpoint, the timing of the London atrocities was all wrong. If you were really suicide bombers, with serious, attainable goals - a British withdrawal from Iraq, say - why would you wait till after the General Election? Instead, the alleged bombers struck after the Election and after the Olympic Committee's decision - losing another opportunity to damage British prestige.

Indeed, the alleged bombers waited till the Election and the Olympic decision were in the bag, and, as Private Eye pointed out, timed their atrocities to coincide with BBC2's The New Al Qaeda, and Channel 4's The Cult of the Suicide Bomber. Both The Eye and The Guardian treated the 7/7 attacks as proof that The Power of Nightmares was wrong, in some way.

I have no idea what went on on 7/7, but based even on a couple of flyers and these websites, I wouldn't pick ACCIDENT as the most likely explanation. Clarke's decision to do so, and his rejection of a public enquiry into 7/7, seem par for the New Labour course, and deeply corrupt.

In the end, the 7/7 horrors served to validate the corporate flacks and gangsters gathering for the G8 meeting in Edinburgh. The media strove to make these crooks look 'statesmanlike,' and ended its brief focus on the massive 'Make Poverty History' campaign. In the same way, 9/11 validated the struggling, unelected G.W. Bush presidency, and ended all media focus on the massive Third World Conference on Slavery, which had taken place in South Africa, and demanded the First World pay reparations, the week before.

If anyone doubts the existence of political conspiracies, let them consider the following conspiracies to pervert the course of justice, ongoing in England, Ireland, and the USA:

1) the choice and use of 'Lord' Butler and previous noble 'Lords' - by the politicians under investigation - to investigate serious political crimes, including war crimes,
2) the choice of judges in the Shannon Airport Ploughshares anti-war case (two judges, supposedly selected by the Irish judicial system for their impartiality, have been forced to remove themselves - the second one for undeclared personal & political links to GW Bush),
3) the US judicial system's choice of one Reggie Walton - another GW Bush crony - to decide the Valerie Plame and Sibol Edmonds cases. Walton has twice been 'randomly' assigned to judge Edmonds' whistleblower cases.

All the above may happen randomly. Yet, strangely, they all benefit the same handful of powerfully-connected individuals. If the choice of judge wasn't random, it was criminal. And, if more than one individual was involved in the decision to commit the crime, then it was - by the definition of the word - a conspiracy.

Merry Xmas!

Joined: 28 Dec 2005 Posts: 2

Hi Alex,

Just a quick reply to say thank you very much for the link to the blog and your kind words in relation to what is written there.

I thought you might like to know that I have a written an article called London 7/7: How To Be Good - Part 1 that discusses the actual, official and independently confirmed train times of the Luton-King's Cross Thameslink trains and the bombed London Underground trains and how these timings relate to the alleged movements of the alleged suicide bombers and the evidence presented in the case against them.

Based on the official and independently confirmed facts about the train times, the article also urges members of the public to take the media to task over their ongoing reporting of factual inaccuracies in connection with the events in London when 56 people died and over 700 were injured.

I have also set-up a July 7th public investigation forum to track public complaints to the media and Press Complaints Commission about factually inaccurate July 7th articles and as an independent archive, discussion and analysis of information surrounding the events of July 7th.

The July 7th Investigation Forum can be found here:
http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showforum=24

The How To Be Good - Part 1 complaints tracking forum is here:
http://z13.invisionfree.com/julyseventh/index.php?showforum=27

Thank you again for write-up and the link, I'm deeply honoured.

Joined: 16 Nov 2005 Posts: 17

I read the How To Be Good article, too - and recommend it highly to all our readers! Thanks very much for such a thoughtful and interesting site - and for pursuing this very important matter.
And happy new year!

Joined: 25 Dec 2005 Posts: 2

Thanks to both of you, for taking to task the topic that may wake the british from thier slumber, the way 9/11 awoke many in the states to how the game is played.

Joined: 28 Dec 2005 Posts: 2

Thanks Alex and commanderson for your support.

It comes just at an odd time as not one but two posts in as many days, both in a very anti-asking-questions vein, have been published by 'Rachel North', a Piccadilly Line survivor devoted to calling for a public inquiry people in her survivor group don't believe will get them any closer to the truth they deserve. One of these survivors, Emily, states:

Joined: 02 Jan 2006 Posts: 3

edited for spelling and reposted below

Joined: 02 Jan 2006 Posts: 3

Hello, this is Rachel North, one of the survivors of the Piccadilly line bomb, from the first carriage

I understand that Emily, Pauline, Kirsty, Mark, Amy and the other Piccadilly survivors quoted on my blog have signed the petition for a public enquiry, as have many I have not quoted and 280 other people including survivors from the other explosions and bereaved .Indeed, it was because they all wanted an enquiry that the petition was set up.

We may not expect much, from a public enquiry, but it will be a start, and rather than condemn it as a white wash before it has even happened, we would like to try. If afterwards we think it is a white wash, then we will complain some more. Then the unbiased, non-paranoid, open-minded investigative journalists can step in. ( * not the conspiracy theorists, please, they are neither neutral nor trustworthy, and they are selective with their reporting and ignorant and ignoring of any facts that do not fit their theories. I do not want them to make enquiries on my behalf, they are worse than useless - they choose to beleive stuff and try to twist the evidence to support their claims)

But an independent public enquiry is our best chance of getting information about 7/7 out into the open, and of helping others and of getting learnings from the experience. I have written about why we want a public enquiry extensively on my blog, started in July 2005 and ialso n a feature in the Sunday Times and on the BBC site.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4529420.stm

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-1937542,00.html

What we don't want is to say straight away that it is all a conspiracy and nobody can be trusted, which is the paranoid starting position position that the Antagonist and other conspiracy theorists start from. This does nobody any favours at all, least of all those who want the truth.

I'd like to start with the information that we can get officially from as many sources as possible, and work from there. You never know, we might be pleasantly surprised by how muych we do get told. I'd rather start at the top that commission a Truth Commission run by internet pundits! Which is what Bridget Donne and The Antagonist seem to want!

I am asking for questions to be answered about 7/7. So are other survivors. So to say I am 'anti-questions' is ludicrously wrong. And a quickie glance at my blog, and anythign else I write will prove so

http://rachelnorthlondon.blogspot.com/

What I am also doing though, is trying to distance myself and other survivors from being tarred with the same brush as the conspiracy theorists, like the Antagonist, who have the cheek and temerity to say there were no bombs, but insist that there were power surges and that the bus was staged and nobody died on it - it was 'pyrotechnics' and 'stuntmen'.

This is just a lie. It is really, really offensive and I will not pretend that I am anything other than disgusted by this, as a survivor of a bomb on that day.

It is quite abhorrent to be told that there were no bombs when you saw people screaming and dying and bleeding, when you know bereaved people and the rescuers and firemen and police and LU staff who ran to help, when there are injured people in the group. I myself was 7-10 feet from the bomb. Other people in Kings Cross United, our survivor support group, were closer still. And we are in contact with londonrecovers.com, another survivor forum, and the people there, and with sevenseven support, another survivor/bereaved site.

It was most certainly a bomb, it was 4 bombs, not a power surge. And this is why we want NOTHING to do with the Antagonist's lies. I need to be at pains to distance my rational demands for an enquiry and answers from delusional rantings that it was all a government conspiracy.

We are no fans of the Government, many of us. I myself have protested about the attacks on civil liberties, about Blair and Bush and the Iraq war. I wrote a post called 90 days and 90 nights

http://rachelnorthlondon.blogspot.com/2005/11/90-days-and-90-nights.html

which unexpectedly flew round the blogosphere and was, I am told, printed out and passed about the backbenchers during the Anti Terror Bill deliberations and picked up by the Guardian and Times. I absolutely do not support draconian terror legislation, nor am I here to peddle some Government line.

But neither am I a paranoid conspiracy theorist, and I do not want the calls for an enquiry to be tainted by mistaken association with people like the Antagonist, with his crap about there being 'no bombs' when I saw people torn into pieces, when I left carriage one covered in blood with shrapnel embedded in my wrist bone. When I am part of a group of dozens of survivors, when we know the truth.

What does he know? He wasn't there, we were. And yet he calls us liars!

I have asked the Antagonist questions - why he insists there were no bombs? Why he peddles the discredited Visor exercise conspiracy ( see Channel 4 - News-

http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=372

I have asked why he thinks it was all a cover up and a conspiracy. He doesn't answer. Which is really odd, since he seems to relish unanswered questions, and here is a real survivor with access to lots of useful information about a subject that clearly interest him - and he has nothing to say!

He keeps asking instead 'who benefits?' I have answered this, and many of his other questions on my blog http://rachelnorthlondon.blogspot.com/. Let me ask the same question to all who buy this 'it'was a conspiracy' theory. You claim a conspiracy. Who benefits?

Blair's popularity has gone down since 7/7, as has the already dwindling support for the war, draconian bills failed to pass, ID cards are not welcomed and it's been pointed out that they would not have stopped suicide bombers. Muslims seeks answers as do all communities, there is a real debate at last about segregation and extremism and multiculturalism and its failings and benefits. People still use the tube, there is not a noticeable climate of fear and a rallying round right wing causes and the flag as there was after 9/11. Mosques do not burn. You can't conflate 7th July and 9/11, they are different things. We have not invaded Leeds or bombed Bradford!

Yes we have questions, but being associated with people like the Antagonist who insists that there were no bombs we can do without.

Thank you for allowing me to make this point on your boards.

Rachel, a bomb survivor.

Yes, a bomb survivor, not a Government plant or a liar or a publicity seeker or a propagandist or a psy ops Mossad agent any of the other things that the Antagonist is probably keen to infer that I am. I ask you to look at what I write, and what he writes and to draw your own conclusions about who is talking sense and who has, let us be charitable - 'issues'.

Joined: 03 Jan 2006 Posts: 1 Location: London UK

Interesting how the same Rachel who posted in a comment on the Antagonist's 7/7 How to be good article:

Joined: 02 Jan 2006 Posts: 3

Popped over here after posting this on the Antagonist. Why? I explain at the end. I will repost much of what I said there, here, as it is pertinent.

1. James, a KCU passenger queued next to Germaine Lindsey at a platform 5 or 6 people deep, they both tried to board the train together.

Lindsey got on, and James couldn't, he got onto carriage 2 instead. He clearly saw Lindsey as they stood next to each other, they saw each other's faces. One got on the train and then one couldn't - James slipped behind Lindsey as they boarded the door, or tried to.
Here I admit a typo, I said at first when I rattled off my angry reply James was 'on my carriage', I meant 'on my train', and I am happy to clarify - he got on carriage 2. As I said. Apologies for the initial typo. It was a genuine mistake.

Do you see how you can queue to get onto a train next to a man, step on behind him into a crowded carriage, give up and push back down to carriage 2?

2. By the way, the bombs went off at 8.50am in carriage one, train 311, driven by Tom and accompanied by Ray Wright who was to accompany Tom to Acton Town having got on at KX. Ray has given permission to let me give his name. I hope that this fact helps you and other people who are keen to know such details. And because I continue to answer genuine questions, in the hope of the truth being heard, I have just checked bomb times with Kings Cross United for you. We agree - 8.50am.

3. I referred to the train as 'the 8.56' as that was what we were told it was called and how it was generally described so that is how we referred to it. As anyone who uses the Tube knows, the trains don't run on time so I attached no mystical significance to the time. For all I knew, 'the 8.56am train' might refer to the fact that it was meant to change drivers or arrive somewhere else at 8.56am. Hope that clarifies confusion.

4. And when the bomb went off, and I wrote about it late at night on 7th July, I thought then it was 8.55/8.56am, and said in my original survivor diary 'about 5 to 9' - but my watch was fast. I definitely texted my partner at Russell Square at 9.16am, and he still has the text. I worked out later, when I was less shocked, that if the bomb HAD gone off at 8.56am there would not have been enough time for me to get down the tunnel. And now the group have just confirmed it; 8.50 it was. I sincerely hope this helps you as I know you set great store by these things on this website and others like it.

5. Glad you agree it was bombs, Kier & Bridget . Many people on this sort of site don't, which I find disgraceful, for reasons I will explain agin in more detail later.The Antagonist insists for example that no-one was killed on the bus - it was 'stuntmen' and 'pyrotechnics', which I think is like being a Holocaust denier since I know people who were on the bus when it exploded. And if I come across as angry, well, that is because I am not sure if you realise just how angry I am , and how angry other survivors are and bereaved, when we hear such things. I have been seething about these lies for months. Fianlly I decide to let it out. At least now when I am angry, I find it healthier to be angry and to say so, rather than just read the lies and shake and weep with rage.I have perhaps some hope that it will shake some people who enjoy conspiracy theorising out of their complacency and make them see that spreading lies is deeply hurtful. And it has real conswequences for real people.

6. Various people such as Prole/Bridget harping on about whether they gopt the 7.20 or 7.40 or whatever train, I have in the oast lost my temper with The point about which train they got, to make their way to KX - it doesn't matter, to me, I am simply certain that the man Germaine Lindsey got onto the train and bombed it, why? because I trust eye witnesses and the police on this.

Therefore I am unruffled about whether there were early journalistic errors in initial reports of what time train they got. I really don't worry much about it. This does not make me heartless scum. I can see that you are all terribly excited about it, but it is not really a detail that worries me. You see, I was there, that was enough. I know others who were there.There is enough verifiable truth in what survivors and police and other witnesses say for me to let such small inaccuracies go with ease.

WhaT I have asked Bridget, and what she has NOT answered, is whether she beleives that the men got on the trains with bombs and let them off, ort not? And since I do beleive they did, the exact damn train they got is not very important to me. I don't care what bus you took to get to the pub and have a drink with me, the fact is that you are here having a drink. Etc.

What really bothers me is that young men got on trains and suicide bombed them. I feel sure that any confusion over which train they caught will sort itself out in due course. I don't think it was a lie, I think it is genuine early confusion and misreporting for no sinister reason, just that things get misreported quite often. Example: I gave a short interview to the Observer last weekend to call out for other survivors to join KCU - one last push to let people know we are here if they want to meet fellow passengers - as we approach 6 months on - and the writer got 2 major details wrong - the depth of the tunnel and the exit station of most passengers - which kind of proves my point about mistakes do happen - even though I gave him the right info, mistakes unfortunately happen often. They don't prove conspiracies.

7.. I do find, unfortunately, believe they were suicide bombers. Unlike most conspiracy theorists. Now that doesn't make me anti Muslim, nor pro-civil liberty curtailment, nor a terrified and Government-loving sheep.If you read the piece about Khaled Al- Berry on my blog for example, an ex-extremist, you'd see wehaty I mean. When I wrote that I spent several hours considering what drives young men to such hatred and the nature of the death cult that Islamofascism is - note - not Islam, this is a hideous perversion of it.

And yes, I have spent considerable time on this subject of Islam, studying theology at college, re-reading the Qu'ran and Islamic scholars since 7/7, talking to muslim friends. That the family and friends of the 4 bombers are shocked and denying of their loved ones terrible end is unfortunately not proof that they were NOT indoctrinated into a perverse set of beliefs - when any murder hits the headlines, watch colleagues, neighbours, families of the murderer all say blankly to camera - 'but he seemed so nice! So quiet!'.

So I do believe they were suicide bombers. I feel a terrible pity for them as humans, as well as an utter hatred of what they did. My anger is more directed towards the lying filth who preach this perversion of Islam, who never, it will be noted, volunteer to strap the bombs on themselves or into their own rucksacks, but instead prey on the furious, nihilistic young men to do it for them. Those who peddle vile lies get the sharpest end of my wrath. And always will do. Whether fundemtalist hate-preachers, or fundementalist conspiracy theorists, or holocaust deniers, or neo Nazis, anyone who pushes irrational lies for reasons of power and hatred I really do have a massive problem with.

You do have to remember that these men will have been told that they were doing a great and glorious thing, and that nothing in this life matters as much as joiing Allah in Paradise. Khan says as much in the 27 minute video. Wives, kids, jobs - are of no consequence to the holy soldier. That is the nature of a death cult.

8. Why do I bother? Well. I come here because I care about truth, I 'chase people about the internet' because I care about truth and I am angry with liars, I have been angry with lies told by conspiracists for months and months and I have some time off work and I can finally make a few points.

I am angry because I am campaigning to protect civil liberties and to have an independent enquiry, and I do not want to be labelled a delusional conspracist - people who say everything is a conspiracy do much harm to people like me who have genuine, reasonable questions.

And I am not on my own, I am part of a group of survivors, I know dozens of people who were affected by that day. I have heard dozens of witness accounts, talked to dozens of people. That morning in July has a profound and ongoing effect on my life and on other lives. I keep saying, I know not only survivors, but bereaved, I know police, first responders, station staff, the train drivers, fire officers. And I care about them, I care about all of us. And I also have access to a very great more information than you.

And if that makes me appear self righteous, then tough. It is hard to be anything else when you know what happened and you are dealing with people who don't, and weren't there, and won't listen. And who quite often do appear to be mad.

I care, passionately, that you do not tell lies about us, I care that people understand that there were real bombs, real suicide bombers, I wish they 'd wake up and understand, and do something about it.

Like what? Well, if you look at everything I have said and done since the bombs, what I believe people should do is draw together, talk,reach out. Try to understand why some men are so filled with hate that they kill. Look at the poitics, at whether what we call multculturalism is just segregation and poverty in disguise. Safeguard and cherish our civil liberties. Admit our faults where we have them and apologise, fearlessly point the finger at those preaching hate and tell them its not ok, and ask Muslims to help us flush out the hatemongers from within their community - our community.

Deciding that there are no bombs, or the Government did it, is to my mind a terrible and dangerous thing and a cop out - the answer lies in being grown up enough to admit the truth and to ask why Khan, Lindsey et al got to that stage of nihilstic hate - and dealing with it. It may be painful. These are hard questions, they may require soul searching and hard answers. But living in a fantasy land gets us nowhere.

And that is why over the last 2 days I have cared enough to come here and argue with you people. I admit that I have been rude and very angry with some people some of the time - but I have been personally attacked and had very nasty insinuations made about me on many ocasions so there you go.

You tell me how nice it is to call survivors of a mass murder, liars? To deny the bombers bombed? To claim the bus explosion was a fake? That nobody died on that bus? That we lied about the explosions, that it was a power surge? To suggest that I set up groups and campaigns and write about what happened not to help other survivors but because I want to be a celebrity or something? That really is pretty low. Don't you think?

People been attacking me and what I believe in, people have thrown very grave insults and insinuations my way - which I can cope with - jsut about - but to deny the bombs ever happened I cannot forgive, and I will not apologise for calling those who say such things deluded - and that is being charitable.

Wake up. You are clearly all very passionate about this - why not apply that passion to something worthwhile - safeguarding civil liberites, understanding geopolitical causes and consequences feeding pathological ideology, how angry young men can be and why and who fans their anger into death cult hate? You clearly care, so why not care about something REAL?

Rather than pissing about with the numbers of trains and the details of train timetables?

I don't have to come herre and argue with you, no, much as I didn't have to protest about civil liberties being eroded on Parliament Square before Christmas, or march repeatedly against the Iraq war, or set up Kings Cross United, or go through rape trials to get sadistic predators sent down. I could sit back, shut my eyes, have an easy life. But I do these things because I care about people, I care about truth, and it is part of who I am.

I'm back at work on Thursday, so these quiet few days after Christmas is a chance to let go of a lot of things that have been bugging me for months. I'm damn glad I fought back against these lies. I'm glad that I have pointed out what some of your webfriends have been saying. It needed to be said, and I feel a damn sight better for saying it.
Thanks

By thre way, all the genuiine and sanme reasons why I & other survivors want a public enquiry can be found on my blog and on the Sunday Times, on BBC online and were also on Radio 2 when I spoke to Jeremy Vine. It's no secret why I want tone. Go look here. http://rachelnorthlondon.blogspot.com/

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-1937542,00.html
another survivors take here

http://yorkshirelassinlondon.blogspot.com/2005/12/this-is-what-democracy-looks-like-this.html

and there are many more links and info on my blogroll.

Do hope that not only answers Bridget's questions but privides you all with some more info to mull over and have a think about.