Cox Forum

Joined: 03 Jan 2006 Posts: 7 Location: London UK

Thanks Rachel for telling me Why Who and What I am, and excuse me for disagreeing with you. You lack any evidence to back up your assertions about me, but then let's not allow evidence to get in the way of supposition, conjecture and misinformation.

I question the evidence, not you personally. Evidence, or rather the lack of it, that supports a version of events that 4 young men from Leeds caught a train from Luton and bombed 3 trains and a bus on 7/7/05.

As you well know, the journey we are told they made from Luton Thameslink (and yes, the Met said the Thameslink) was not possible. Perhaps this does not matter. Perhaps no 'facts' matter. Perhaps the truth does not matter. Perhaps the only important thing is that we all swallow what we are told is the official version of events.

Sorry Rachel, but it does matter to me. When we are told the truth then I will shut up. At the moment I have seen nothing that convinces me that we have been told the truth. As I have said before, only the truth stands up to rigorous investigation. The threadbare version we have seems to fall apart at the first step. The first step being the journey from Luton to London.

It is a strange irony that those who are checking out the facts are being suspected by the BTP of being 'terrorists'. As if terrorists would be so stupid, but then we are all suspected terrorists now according to current legislation. I wonder how long before discussing these incidents, let alone questioning them, becomes a criminal act.

The truth is more important to me than any individual, government or system. I will stick to investigating the facts and the evidence, in my own small way, and then discussing these with people on forums who are also concerned with the truth, along with posting any information I gather on my blog.
_________________
In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell

Joined: 06 Jan 2006 Posts: 9

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. Twisted Evil

Joined: 02 Jan 2006 Posts: 17

Do feel absolutely free to check my IP address, and do feel free to continually embarrass yourrself Chavez with your a) utter inability to answer my questions of you - what evidence do you expect a bombed commuter to produce? b) your insistence in the face of all evidence that I , not you, are the liar round here.

How odd that I have convinced the police, the Government, the hospital, the press, the BBC, ITN, and everyone else, my work, my family, my friends, and yet only you - little internet troll seems to think I am not genuine. More fool you, Chavez. More silly fool you.

Joined: 02 Jan 2006 Posts: 17

I said
I have seen nothing - nothing to convince me at all that what I saw and felt and have heard and seen with the evidence of my own senses is a lie - and that what you say, sat at a desk, typing onto a computer - or hanging around stations - has any merit

But let us look at what you and the other conspiracy theorists offer. Nothing but questions, only questions, without any evidence to back up your claims

You love questions, you say you want answers. I repeat.

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?

Yes, or no?

Or in your own words...

''but then let's not allow evidence to get in the way of supposition, conjecture and misinformation. ''

Joined: 03 Jan 2006 Posts: 7 Location: London UK

Joined: 18 Jan 2006 Posts: 2

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. Police are shooting to kill without a by-your-leave, the PM readjusts the no-spy rule on fellow MP's, glorifying stuff becomes a crime. We are not heading toward a police state.It's here. Today(18/01/06) we find,via the BBC no less, that during the hours of the Menezes ritualised execution, no recordings were being made of the radio comms. between the operatives in the field and their HQ(Miss C Dick). See a pattern here anyone? Only a few years ago, it would not suffice for the prosecution to brandish a photograph purporting to be of the suspects and which places them 50 miles or more from the scene of the crime, in order to get a conviction, but that's what has happened here. I feel like 'alwun' in wonderland' as I notice that most of my 60million fellow Brits have swallowed this bull**** hook line and sinker. What's to be done, please? anyone?..

Joined: 02 Jan 2006 Posts: 17

Dear Bridget or Prole,
'What evidence have we seen/ been shown to back up this claim?' you ask.

Oh, y'know, a suicide bombers confession video, CCTV photos, CCTV photos of a dummy run,

I repeat the questions to you again...
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?

Yes, or no?

I wait.

And I've explained Alwun, ad nauseam, why I originally got into this. A conspiracy theorist, 'The Antagonist' linked to my blog. When I followed the link, it turned out he was insisting that there was no bomb on my carriage! He had used my account to support a lie. A lie he still maintains. When challenged about it, he wriggled. When I pointed out I had been there AND KNEW OVER 70 OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAD ALSO BEEN ON THE TRAIN and who knew it was not power surges, as he maintained in his blog

http://antagonise.blogspot.com/2005/07/bbc-survivor-blast-discrepancies.html
and he still maintained the lie, I became angry enough to get interested and follow up what other nonsense was being published 7th July. I got angry enough to fight back.

This has been an eye opener, what sort of people are so determined to make such mischief?

Let them call me a liar, I know what happened. I know it was a bomb not a power surge. I know the bomb was in, not under the train. So I will disagree in public wioth people who say, in public, that it was a power surges and bombs under the Piccadilly line train.

If you disbelieve the evidence presented to you, you should be able to explain what other evidence has caused you to believe it. You can believe what you want - you can believe in the Tooth Fairy if you want - but don't expect your claims to be taken seriously if you cannot produce any rationale for your beliefs other than 'a vague sense of foreboding' and some disrecrepancies in the media which are far more easily explained as simple error and early confused reporting, than a cunningly controlled Conspiracy.

Look at the gaffes and fuck ups that daily fill the political papers pages and then ask your self, could the Government pull such an ingenious hoax off? And why would they bother? The Antagonist's theory that the bombs were power surges then the Govt. conconcted a tale of terrorists to cover them up is as ludicrous as spilling red wine on the carpet and then burning down the house to cover the mistake.

Anyone can ask pointless questions...here's a few for you all reading this who believe that there were no bombs, or that the bus was a fake explosion.

Why don't any of you think for example, that the whole 7th July thing was not faked and nobody died? ( Actually, there are some conspiracy theorists who say for example that the bus was not bombed and on it were'actors and stuntmen' using 'pyrotechnics' and nobody died.)

Look, here he is saying it.
http://antagonise.blogspot.com/2005/07/london-77-in-response-to-bridget-dunne.html

You want to look at this, Antagonist? And tell her that her son never died? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/uk/05/london_blasts/victims/default.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4671367.stm

And the Antagonist is supported by Alex Cox on this blog and on the entry that leads to this page. Bridget Dunne too is warmly recommeneded by The Antagonist. The one who said there was no bomb near me. The one who says to Marie Fatayi Williams that the bus did not explode and her son did not die - when he publishes that the No.30 bus was an 'exercise'. .

Why don't you run with the theory that 666 people died and all the footage was faked to cover up far more deaths than were reported? Why do you not think Father Christmas, or aliens did it? Why not ten trains blowing up, or 666 trains blowing up How about the suggestion that the Twin Towers did not really fall down but what you saw was the product of a mass hallucination caused by CIA poisoning the water with psychoactive drugs? Or holograms? ? Etc.

Oh, perhaps I've given some of you some ideas. Any moment, I expect to see more blogs springing up and linking to The Antagonist, with something along the above lines
I'm not going away so you can all back-slap each other and pretend you are Mulder and Scully. I'm going to watch you and argue with you because I'm angry enough to bother. I have to live with this stuff all the time, so why the hell not?

The only status I have is of one who was there, the insight I have for the same reason. I was there, with others, you were not. It is my words being twisted which started all of this, my integrity questioned - hello Chavez and other posters here - when there are posts on here and on other blogs calling me liar, or Psy-ops or fake, and that is why I am going to be sceptical to you. Hysteria? No, cold, hard anger. That Alwun wants to discuss 7th July but doesn't want the person who was there to join in or contribute - in fact, he wants to censor my vioce - whilst you all play detectives and speclators- says a lot, don't you think?

This is actually getting quite interesting. The depth of paranoia theories available on the internet, the many different theories about the same event, the way no-one believes the same thing yet all insist that the 'official version' is wrong, no matter what source the 'official version' comes from. It is as if each conspiracy theorist reveals something different about themselves and thir psyche with their differring views, each theory is like a fingerprint revealing their inmost fears and fantasies.

Someone should write a book about it.

Wink

Joined: 28 Dec 2005 Posts: 7

For those of us above ground that morning (however much longer we stay that way despite daring to read, notice inconsistencies and write fact checking emails) who were following events via rolling news channels and radio broadcasts, the story was of power surges and up to six explosions on the underground until such time as the diverted Number 30 bus exploded in Tavistock Square.

On the day of July 7th, the bus was the only visible image of what occurred and there exist a very great number of anomalies and questions about the diverted number 30 bus. The speculation that the bus might have been taken from Peter Power's rehearsal operation is just that, speculation. Take it for what it is, nothing more, nothing less.

The facts that exist in the public domain are precisely that, facts. Facts about two Piccadilly Line train numbers, facts about train times of the Thameslink trains from Luton to King's Cross that morning, facts about the times the bombed trains left King's Cross and the non-existence of anything that vaguely resembles evidence. All of these are facts. All independently verified facts, confirmed by offical sources and it is as facts they stand until they are corrected.

At the time something occurs - e.g. a bomb going off, or a power surge occurring - a snapshot of that moment can be represented in an entirely binary fashion. All influencing factors involved in the event are contained in that snapshot and can be represented as being the case, or not being the case. So, in relation to the official story:

Joined: 06 Jan 2006 Posts: 9

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.

Joined: 03 Jan 2006 Posts: 7 Location: London UK

Joined: 19 Jan 2006 Posts: 1 Location: North West

The Channel 4 article which Rachel from N.London cites as an 'explanation'/dismissal of the Peter Power/Visor Consulting exercises does not presnt a satisfactory explanation, more a case of Nothing to see here, Move Along Now.....

The same exercise or real time ploy was also used on 9/11 with the emergency services.

I remember phoning a friend in South London on the evening of 7/7 to check that he was not affected by any of the events. He recounted to me the very strange atmosphere evident well BEFORE the 'explosions' at 8.50am.

Some links quoting peoples personal experiences of such delays are presented below.

http://disruptive.org.uk/2005/07/13/london_bombs_8.html
http://www.ureader.co.uk/message/1237059.aspx
http://www.hof.org.uk/cgi-bin/newdisplaypost.pl?1:245801.cc (qoted below)

The differing circumstances of the early morning of 7/7 (e.g. large presence of police etc. ) to a 'normal' commuting day, MUST, I believe, have been related to pre-knowledge of the events to happen later that day.

The evenys of 7/7 took the heat off Bush/Africa/Fair Trade & put the WAR ON TERROR right back on the front burner. if anyone has any doubt on this, just watch this Fox News clip, & listen to the sad 'glee' in the commentator's voices.
http://mediamatters.org/static/video/foxandfriends-200507070004.wmv Windows Media or
http://mediamatters.org/static/video/foxandfriends-200507070004.mov Qicktime

Oh & Rudolph Giuliani over in the UK, right on cue to pop up on the radio news programmes/Newsnight etc. to immediately draw the link between 7/7 & 9/11. From a Yorkshire post article of 7/7 reviewing Mr Giuliani's speech at the Local government Conference in harrogate on 6th July:

Joined: 18 Jan 2006 Posts: 2

'fraid not. this was mentioned on the bbc news at six 18/01/02 and since then nothing. It appears nowhere on their website. The usual geriatric retired policeman is whingeing on about the guntoters handing in their tickets just in case, I suppose, that they might be prosecuted if they murder somebody in the cowardly, ritualised fashion that witnesses have described in the Menezes murder, where the footage goes amiss as well as the comms. records. Policeman prosecuted for murder?? bwahaha! as if.

You couldn't make it up. But they are.

Whatever can be said about 'rachel', at least the bluster and constant referrals to her suffering ad naseum points up the absolute lack of evidence to support the official conspiracy theory or 'narrative' as it has now become.

I daresay that the report will eventually filter through, and the point about the missing comms. records will surface again.

Joined: 19 Jan 2006 Posts: 1 Location: UK

www.spiritualalchemy.com/product_info.php?products_id=6795

Follow this link to the DVD produced by a guy called Ian Crane, which looks at the similarity between the events of 9/11 and 7/7; it also includes recordings of the July 7 Radio 5 Live and ITV interviews with Peter Power of Visor Consultants. The DVD documents the evidence which points towards the prior planning of the 9/11 events and the 'necessity' of 7/7 to take the media attention away from the G8 discussions at Gleneagles.

Crane is not your bulk standard 'conspiracy theorist'. Apparently he is a retired ex-Oilfield Services executive, who has lived and worked in both the Middle East and in the USA.

Rachel should go along to one of his presentations, just to hear what he has to say. He appears to have no agenda other than to point out the glaring anomolies between the 'official' versions of 9/11 & 7/7 and the accumulated evidence. Last year he gave about 20 talks on the subject and seems to really know his stuff. I went along to a talk that he gave in Blackpool, which was absolutely brilliant, he also discussed Peak Oil and presented the evidence that pointed at the coming attack on Iran.

On the back of the DVD cover it says, " Ian is not offering specific answers ..... but for those who truly value democracy, it is imperative that they are aware of these extremely important and, as yet, unanswered questions."

I have seen details of his talks posted on the forum at www.nineeleven.co.uk

Joined: 02 Jan 2006 Posts: 17

'Rachel: Any tips on how to get facts published in the mainstream media?'
- Antagonist.
'Yep. Get off a bombed train and write about your experience in an authentic voice. Keep writing, in a style that people want to read. Speak the truth. Have relevant stuff to say.

The mainstream media then tend to get in touch and ask you to write for them, at least, that has been my experience. I/KCU had 300 + enquiries, I/KCU did about 12, with the support and agreement of the group, because we had the strategy of letting fellow passengers know about KCU and talkign to the media was the way to let people know we existed: the strategy worked and then we stopped. KCU turns down far more requests than it takes up.

After the experience I was asked to write my own story for the Sunday Times, and after that I was asked to write about the case for a Public Enquiry. Why? Just because the paper liked the way I wrote and what I said, I suppose.

Onto the Public Enquiry petition. The only place the link to sign the public enquiry is my blog and a few other blogs that link to it, so 331 signatures from me, who gets a few hundred hits a day is ok for a small personal survivor blog to generate. The link and address of the online petition has never been published or mentioned in the mainstream media. If anyone wants to publish it great, but it is not a story in its own right. I'd like more people to support it, but a lot of us are waiting for the narrative to appear and then go tonto.

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.

Actually, at this point, I'm going to reiterate what detail I know and can vouch for personally here, just because I think it will be helpful to share what I know with the more sensible of you who are not flinging out trolling insults but seem anxious to engage. I am busy at work today but will type up for 5 minutes here and there in between my work. I will be as factual and non-emotive as possible. Having had a chance to vent my massive irritation at conspiracy theorists in general which came out of me being directly misquoted by one to peddle a theory that the bombs never happened - I can now see that some of you are trolls like Chavez, some of you are deeply sceptical and some of you are polite and well -intentioned and think you are onto something. Even though I think you are picking up odd and understandable disrecrepancies and making mountains out of molehills, making 2 & 3 make 10. Or 77, mwah ha ha..

So. Here we go with what I know from MY personal experience, informed by stuff I know conspiracy theorists are interested in and trying to keep the emotive side to a minimum.

When I arrived at Finsbury Park station at about 8.20am. I bought cigarettes and a magazine and a single ticket and walked down to the platform of the westbound Piccadilly line. The plaform was heaving and it was clear that there was general chaos and that the trains were running very late and all of them were delayed. I asked why and was told that there was a fire reported earlier at Caledonian Road which had caused massive delays and there were fewer trains running than normal and those that were running were running late, hence massive overcrowding. So far, so normal - an unusually shitty day on the Piccadilly line but I have been using this line since 1995 and was not especially surprised to hear of problems.

I boarded the train at Finsbury Park at 8.42am according to the station clock just in front of me at the end of the platform. I had waited for 2 trains to pass already, they being too crowded to board. I was reading Marie Claire magazine containing an account of a violent attack on me in July 2002. I wanted to finish the article, which was disturbing, before I boarded but it was clear to me that I was running very late for work so I walked to the very front of the train and entered by the first set of double doors and stood by the pole in the centre between the first set of double doors as the first carriage is usually less crowded being furthest from the Finsbury Park station entrance so most people can't be bothered to walk all the way up the platform to board.

The journey was normal up to Kings Cross with more and more people squeezing on at each stop: Arsenal, Holloway Rd, Caledonian Rd, then we reached Kings Cross.

At Kings Cross I could see that the platform was very very crowded - my impression was that it was five people deep and completely full. Where you join the first carriage at Kings Cross there is an escalator & platform entrance very nearby and so it is a very busy part of the platform unlike Finsbury Park, where the platform entrance is quite a way from the first carriage.

The train stopped here for about a minute or possibly even longer, because so many people wanted to get off and even more people wanted to get on. There was a lot of jostling because it was so very crowded. I moved away from the centre pole between the first set of double doors, and moved further towards the ( front, left set as you face direction of travel) doors as people boarded through the right hand set of the first double doors.

We left Kings X and the train rumbled along for about 30 seconds to 1 minute and then the bomb went off.

There was a yellowy-orange flash, then I fell to the floor because of the blast which physically jerked me forward. Because I was so close, I didn't hear the blast, I felt it, and it felt exactly like being punched in the ears. There was then a scraping noise as the train ploughed to a halt. I and the people around me were thrown forward onto the floor in a heap and there began to be screams. The thick black smoke that immediately filled the carriage, and the lights going out was extremely disorientating. It was like being under water, like night diving, without a regulator. It was very hard indeed to breathe, it was choking and pitch dark as all the lights in the train had gone out.

Times: I thought the bomb went off at 8.55/8.56am. This is what I said in my original account. I had glanced at my watch at Caledonian Road and it was about 8.50am from what I can recall ( I was trying to guess how late I would be for work). However, the media reported 8.50 as being the time of the explosion and I believe my watch may have been fast. Most other passengers I have spoken to say 8.50am though a few think 8.55am. To me it seems much more likely now that it was 8.50am as that means 10 minutes of confusion, then 10-12 minutes walking to Russell Square, which was several hundred yards from the nose of the train and as we had to walk in single file most of the way, between the tracks, in case they were still live, it took at least 10 minutes. Therefore I believe 8.50 am is probably more likely, and that my watch saying 8.55 or 8.56 may have been fast. If the bomb went off at 8.56 and I was texting my partner at 9.16am from Russell Square, then we got off the train incredibly quickly, much more quickly than I think we did. Possible, but unlikely. But in such a state of shock, too hard to call. It was certainly too dark to read watches at the time of the explosion in car 1 and there was too much smoke, blood, broken glass to even think about looking at the time - the priority was survival. We used lights from mobile phones to assess injuries. Then we evacuated. I left, pulling a woman frozen with shock off the floor and with me. Behind me, a dying man with missing limbs met my eyes from the floor of the carriage. I knew then it was a bomb, the smell, and the injuries. I did not stay with him, I left with the other survivors. I think I judged that it was hopeless, there was imminent danger of god knows what happening next and we were all too covered in blood and had no medical equipment and could do little.

I know I was at Russell Square at 9.16am because J my partner has a text from me then. It originally felt like we were trapped underground for about half an hour, but in fact it must have been about 10 minutes before the driver opened the door, communicated with us, set up a ladder, and we were able to leave through the front of his cab. By 'we' I mean myself and about 30 or fewer passengers who had been in the front seats, standing between the front seats and standing in between the first set of double doors. Behind us was where the bomb went off, so the people behind us were mostly dead and blown out of the train, or injured, and behind them were people who were still alive at the back of carriage one but who could not get out apart from going back through the train. The centre of the carriage was almost totally destroyed by the explosion. As I have said, it was extremely disorientating - one minute I was on a crowded train, the next minute, flash, blow to the ears, fall over, total darkness, wet face ( that was blood) , struggling to breathe because the air is no longer air, but thick black noxious smoke with a plastic-y, peroxidey smell mixed with burnt meat and hair and burning rubber. It was a vile smell. The temperature rose quickly. Breathing was difficult because of the density of the smoke for the first 10 minutes or so, there was screaming and confusion and terror. Several passengers including myself began to call for calm and to hold hands and to stand up if you were not injured. The driver opened the door and told us he could get us out through the front of the cab, we tried to pass this message back but we did not know that the centre of the carriage had gone at that stage and that so many were dead. There was more light as I left the carriage; by then the emergency lights were on and the smoke was clearing through the broken windows of the carriage.

The smoke was so thick that our faces were like coalminers when we got out. The disorientation contributed to the confusion over the time in early accounts. I can place getting on the train from the station clock, 8.42am I can place exiting the tunnel and getting to Russell Sq at 9.16am from the text as I said. I'm typing this in my odd breaks during the working day so I may be repeating info.

The drivers - there were 2 - one driving and one who joined at KX to take over at Acton town - could not communicate with the train because the explosion had knocked out the power. There are power cables that run 3 foot or so up the tunnel walls, I think these are phone cables, they were destroyed by the explosion. The emergency lights came on in the tunnel which is what happens when the power is knocked out by the explosion.

So, the front of the front carriage evacuated to Russell Square. the middle of the front car was bombed; the bomber having entered through the second set of double doors. Those still alive at the back of carriage one, and the rest of the train, were evacuated via Kings Cross, some of those from carriage one with injuries being led through the train and the majority of the passengers walking down the tracks. Some passengers could not get out via their carriage because there was no room between the carriage and the tunnel wall, they escaped via a different carriage and they were able to get through a gap in the tunnel wall and walk down the eastbound track to KX. The rescuers first on the scene were 2 BTP officers who were on duty at KX looking for G8 protesters going up to Scotland on the mainline trains.

That's enough for now, I have work still to do and I need to go home.

Chavez, you are being very tiresome, which I expect is your aim. I note that you still have not been able to answer the question I asked of you...exactly what evidence do you expect a bombed commuter to provide of the fact that the train blew up apart from police statements, clothing taken for forensic analysis and blast/shrapnel injury treated at UCH?

Did you expect me to have a film crew with me? Or perhaps you think the bomber made a speech and invited us all to listen and record it on our camera phones before blowing himself up?

No answer... but trolls can't answer questions can they?

Joined: 02 Jan 2006 Posts: 17

Let us assume for one second that the government decided to blow people up. What was that supposed to achieve? Has it succeeded in any of the aims one could assume were behind a psy-ops bombing by the state, of the British population.

We were already at war in Iraq, and it has not whetted the appetite for the continuation of the war. Support for the war, already low, has gone down since the July bombings.

Attempts to terrify the population and the Houses of Parliament into support of draconian civil-liberties-restricting new legislation have not worked, see the defeat of the 90 days internment clause in the Anti-Terrorism bill. Support for ID cards has not been forthcoming.

Tony Blair is not riding a wave of loyal support, in fact the Tories have overtaken him in the polls.

The population has failed to succumb to hysteria and has not taken to rioting in the street and torching mosques.

See? If this whole thing was meant to be a black-ops tool to heighten the war against terror it has utterly failed. If it was meant to create support for Blair's war in Iraq, or for US and USA foreign policy it has failed. Even Blair himself made a crapper speech than Ken Livingstone ( from Singapore) - if he had orchestrated it he's surely have got his lines rehearsed? He is also unlikely to have had it all happen at the moment of what was meant to be his great triumph - hosting the G8 and feeding the poor of Africa and sorting out fairer trade, hot from an Olympics triumph. It really cocked that up for him, probably to his lasting chagrin snce he clearly has a desire to be seen as an international statesman.

Meanwhile Muslims themselves have pointed out a dangerous and horrifying strain of hate filled ideology that targets Muslim youths, that exists in the UK as well as abroad. I need not stress how abhorrent it is, and how it is not representative of the teachings of the Qu'ran. It disgusts most people irrespective of faith, politics, ethinicity. But in this age of 24 hour news, the internet and instant information-swapping, it is easy for wild ideas to spread. (Conspiracy theorist sites are proof of that.) An ideology which whips up anger at British and US foreign policy to deadly ends. You can disapprove of US and UK foreign policy and many do, including me, and including many Muslims, but this anger is being exploited by hatemongers for sickening reasons. A deadly misinterpretation of 'jihad' rooted in a perversion of Islam exists , and it really does advocate violence and nihilism and suicide 'martyrdom operations'. You can find it on websites. You can read interviews with those who were recruited and then left. If you spent half as much time researching that as the damn train times, I would have more respect for you. Rather than run with a theory which you don't seem to have evaluated at all before charging in, so sure are you that this is ''another 9/11'', why not examine both sides of the argument in your search for the truth? Why not start with the basic challenge of your hypotheses - is this really another 9/11? Why do you think that? What happened after 9/11 and what happened after 7th July? In what ways are they different?

They are completely different things, happened in different countries, at different stages in the history of 'Al Quaida' - which then was more like a movement with leaders and training camps and bases - but now is more like an idea or a brand. This conflation of the two different events is such a huge and glaring basic error I am really surprised about it, but the fact that you seem to have ignored this basic noddy starting point makes your claims to be a ''seeker of truth'' pretty fucking laughable