 |
Cox Forum
The alexcox.com Discussion Forums
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Rachel
Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 49
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:08 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: | | people feel they've been unfairly insulted. We can discuss forever who has been more unfairly insulted than any other person, or who has more justification in being upset |
Forgive me for pointing out that you were not there
And the justifiation in 'being upset' is the differnce between one researcher saying the other is merely disgreeing about a subject that is purely academic and that ionly affects them when they are researching, and one who along with others is recovering from an attempt on their life that killed many and injured many more.
| Quote: | | I don't contest that you would have read offensive things about yourself, or that you had a right to be angry about it and defend yourself to those people.... |
Thank you.
| Quote: | | but using attack as a form of defence seems to keep sending us all round and round in a pointless circle. |
'Oh, please call me a liar. Please call me a shill. Please deny the bombs went off. Please do. I do't mind in the slightest.'
I don't think so. I have fought fought, fought since the bomb went off, for myself and others, to let the truth be heard.
http://rachelnorthlondon.blogspot.com/2006/03/ready-to-speak-out.html
And I should roll over now, because, why, exactly?
| Quote: |
You say that you have seen no valid questions or well sourced links presented to you, and my response to that is that I have repeatedly made the point that those men could not have caught the 0740, the 0748 or even the 0725 train that morning, since none of those would have got them to Kings Cross mainline station in time to have been picked up on CCTV by 8:26, which is the time the police say they were there. I have backed this up with the evidence provided by the Communications Manager for Thameslink Rail. |
7.20am. Plus, you know, the compelling fact that MY TRAIN WAS SUICIDE BOMBED. And a passenger queued behind the bomber, and the torso of Lindsey lay nex to passengers....but what, pray, do you suggest?
Your version, please? In black and white - or do you have only facile questions, and no firm basis for argumnet at all?
| Quote: | Again, I want to make it clear that I do not dispute your witness account of that day and I do not dispute that there were bombs. I simply dispute the way we've been told who did it, and how, when, as I have pointed out on numerous occasions and with examples, many flaws in these assertions.
Thank you for responding to me personally, Rachel. But I will say again to you that I have never questioned that you are real or suggested that you were not there. So I really hope you will keep that in mind in any future exchanges we might have.
|
I do. Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Prole
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 80
Location: London UK
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rachel I had exactly the same problem trying to access the forum and had to switch to IE (I use firefox),
The forum has moved site and it was something to do with my referer setting, just contact the admin and they will tell you what to do.
_________________
In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rachel
Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 49
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I have contacted them three times; so much for 'free speech'. And my PC settings have never been changed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Prole
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 80
Location: London UK
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is the reply I received from the admin:
Bridget,
Re: Posting to board problems
1. Try removing all nineeleven.co.uk cookies in your browser settings.
2. Log out, then log back in - you might have to login twice for cookie to "catch".
Note: There might be an issue with your client browser; the new site uses special mechanisms to block spammers. That is the only reason i can think of (right now) that you'd be getting a 404 error i.e. not found document. The 404 error indicates that your browser might be sending (or not sending) certain information (in the HTTP header) that ensures you get blocked by the web server when posting only. There is a rule for posting only (for spam bots) ... ;o) I'll tweak it for your setup if required - that should sort you and maybe others out in the future.
To check this, can you let me know what operating system and and web browser you are using? e.g. Mac OS X, Safari or Windows XP, IE 6 etc.
Regards,
Jim (JR)
_________________
In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rachel
Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 49
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
...three times, and heard nothing, by the way, desoite Mr Neal turning up with platitudes on my blog, then claiming, once safely back on his home turf...
| Quote: | So for example, I feel it is fine to suggest that Rachel's writing and campaigning and specificly her attacks on 'conspiraloons' may consciously or unconsciously be aiding the government's attempts to resist a comprehensive inquiry in to questions detailed on this thread, despite her protestations that "it is obvious that I am genuine" .
Well sorry Rachel. You MAY be genuine or you MAY not be but there is nothing obvious about it.
|
Amazigly, I have fooled, the my advertising work place, the police x 9 , 100 survivors, Charles Clarke, Patrick Mercer, UCH, my GP, the Sunday Times, the Times, , The BBC, ITN, BBC Radio 4, London Tonight, BBC World Service, BBC 5 live, BBC radio 2, Newsweek, , Sun, the Guardian, the Independent, The Observer, the Financial Times, the Telegraph, the Evening Standard, the Mail, the Express, the London Assembly, the MP for Hackney, CICA, and everyone else I know.
Oh, and the 9/11 turth meeting where I must have been a hologram, along with the other survicor who attended with me
Gosh, aren't you terribly clever ...let's ask the audience....
Last edited by Rachel on Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:22 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rachel
Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 49
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Prole wrote: | This is the reply I received from the admin:
Bridget,
Re: Posting to board problems
1. Try removing all nineeleven.co.uk cookies in your browser settings.
2. Log out, then log back in - you might have to login twice for cookie to "catch".
Note: There might be an issue with your client browser; the new site uses special mechanisms to block spammers. That is the only reason i can think of (right now) that you'd be getting a 404 error i.e. not found document. The 404 error indicates that your browser might be sending (or not sending) certain information (in the HTTP header) that ensures you get blocked by the web server when posting only. There is a rule for posting only (for spam bots) ... ;o) I'll tweak it for your setup if required - that should sort you and maybe others out in the future.
To check this, can you let me know what operating system and and web browser you are using? e.g. Mac OS X, Safari or Windows XP, IE 6 etc.
Regards,
Jim (JR) |
Hmmm.
I did this already, cleared internet history, logged back in and even tried to re-register with a new name...
OH NO!
gosh, one mighht almost think it a conspiracy! Help! Damn those Illuminati!
Perhaps I am 'hacking' my own PC? Or my 'handlers' are?
But thanks for trying. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Prole
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 80
Location: London UK
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rachel, try deleting the cookies for the nineleven site.
_________________
In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alkmyst
Joined: 19 Jan 2006
Posts: 13
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rachel wrote:
| Quote: | | It is polite not to publish private correspondence sent from my personal email to your personal email and not anything to do with the boards, but I daresday, if you wish to publish it, you will do so, and I cannot stop you, and I daresay you should like nothing more than to upset me, and it will make you feel powerful |
I would absolutely concur that it would indeed be impolite to publish personal Email that is unrelated to the posts on either Alex Cox or nineeleven forum. However, any PM or Email exchange that we have had to date relates only to issues raised on these boards. I have certainly not written anything in a PM or Email to you that I would have any concern about appearing in the public domain.
However, if you there is anything in your last two Emails that you feel is unrelated to these forums, please let me know and I will take your concerns into consideration.
For the record, please be advised that I will not, in future, enter into any PM or Email exchanges with you. Please also be advised that I shall reserve the right to publish any PM or Email that you send to me, either in whole or in part, on these forums.
It is imperative that these exchanges are kept in the public domain.
Al K Myst |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rachel
Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 49
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
You know, I note that threads I contribute to are by far the busiest and go on for pages.
If I cease to engage...then what might I gain? Cui bono from my engagement with this nonsense?
You. Traffic, intelligent debate and credibility.
Me?
Lord, I am tired. So tired. And I have an anorak, I don't need more in my life.
A lightbulb switches on.  ..and good night. Christ, I can be stupid sometimes. 247 replies, 5578 views...and the average where I am not involved is 100 or so views, and posts in the double figures.
Game over. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Prole
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 80
Location: London UK
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rachel
Will you retract the statement that you have been banned from the nineeleven forum that you posted on your blog?
Thanks
_________________
In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kier
Joined: 07 Jan 2006
Posts: 13
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rachel
I know I was not there. As I have previously said to you, it is not the exclusive right of only the people who were there to have an opinion. It is everybody's right to ask questions about it.
I am trying to be objective about the manner in which some discussions you have taken part in have been conducted. Whether or not I was in London on July 7th has nothing to do with my point that the insults going backwards and forwards in those discussions do not serve anybody, regardless of who has the most right to be insulted.
Your next point about your justification in being upset - again - only illustrates the point that your personal experience of that day makes it difficult for people who are asking questions about it to engage in discussion with you. You plainly cannot be objective, and according to you, nor can anybody who wasn't there because they're busy speculating. So each side has reasons not to be objective and each side is so busy pointing this out to the other that any real, purposeful debate about who bombed London on July 7th takes a back seat.
My point about your attacks as a form of defence was to back up exactly the above paragraph. I know exactly what people call you, and I don't attempt to justify or excuse it. I am saying that nothing ever really gets resolved if all you do is respond to those people and not to those of us who genuinely want to find the truth about that day and have no interest in insulting you.
It's not a question of you 'rolling over'. I know you find it tiring and infuriating to feel you have to keep defending yourself. I also find it tiring having to keep defending and justifying my standpoint to you - but I keep on with it in the hope that something useful will come out of it.
I am not sure what you mean by '7.20am'. Are you saying they could have caught a train at 7.20am? How could that be so when they were still outside the station at 7.22am?
Also, part of the issue with the train times is that the first two I quoted were the ones given by various media as the train they caught. They could not have caught either train, so it should not have been reported. The public rely on the media to give them facts, so when something so basic and easily verifiable is reportedly wrongly, I don't think it's unreasonable to point this out.
I don't have a version. I keep saying this. The fact that you ask me that suggests that you don't listen to what I say. I've lost count of the number of posts I've ended by saying things like 'all I want to know is the truth'. I don't claim to be in possession of the truth and I never have. I don't need a theory in order to have questions.
There are questions I keep wanting to ask you, Rachel, that I don't ask because I fear I will only get an aggressive response for having the apparent temerity to ask them. Even the ones I have asked, you don't really respond to, shown by your second reference on this thread to the torso of Lindsay that I asked after the first time you mentioned it if you could explain how the passenger knew was him. You say you would rather people asked you directly instead of going off and twisting your words, so that is what I do, but you can hardly blame people for thinking that it might inflame you further to keep asking the questions, or asking you to expand on a point you made, because then it might look like your account, or other survivor accounts, are being doubted. Yes, there are some people that have expressed doubts, but I am not one of those and that is why I repeatedly ask you to not treat everybody that you see as your 'opponent' in the same way.
Perhaps I should just ask you what you would like me to do? You have assumed I want you to shut up, I have told you that I don't. Do you want me to shut up? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rachel
Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 49
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| alkmyst wrote: | Rachel wrote:
| Quote: | | It is polite not to publish private correspondence sent from my personal email to your personal email and not anything to do with the boards, but I daresday, if you wish to publish it, you will do so, and I cannot stop you, and I daresay you should like nothing more than to upset me, and it will make you feel powerful |
I would absolutely concur that it would indeed be impolite to publish personal Email that is unrelated to the posts on either Alex Cox or nineeleven forum. However, any PM or Email exchange that we have had to date relates only to issues raised on these boards. I have certainly not written anything in a PM or Email to you that I would have any concern about appearing in the public domain.
However, if you there is anything in your last two Emails that you feel is unrelated to these forums, please let me know and I will take your concerns into consideration.
For the record, please be advised that I will not, in future, enter into any PM or Email exchanges with you. Please also be advised that I shall reserve the right to publish any PM or Email that you send to me, either in whole or in part, on these forums.
It is imperative that these exchanges are kept in the public domain.
Al K Myst |
Last post: You publish any private correspondence and you are a officially C*nt of the highest order: it is a truth univerally respected that one does not publish private emails on public boards. Public board is one thing, and private correspondence from a personal email another, bloody hell, what I said must have hit home. Well, deal. And stop publishing lies, I will fight bakc, and in your case, I did so in a personal capacity.
One does not snout through bins, publish private correspondence, read other people's diaries or emails or letters, tape their calls or open their wallets..
You have been warned.
And I mean that.
Good night and good luck. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alkmyst
Joined: 19 Jan 2006
Posts: 13
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 1:45 am Post subject: We'd like to have your thoughts |
|
|
Rachel,
I would very much appreciate an open response to the following proposal:
| Quote: | Rachel,
In an open democracy, which previous comments on your blog would suggest you not only support but would vigorously campaign to uphold, all questions are valid until such time as full, frank and open judicial review has been properly conducted.
The core issue that would appear to be most divisive between, yourself and the 9/11 - 7/7 research community, is your forceful insistance that there is nothing to be gained by questioning the official version of events, ostensibly the allegation that the events of 7/7 were perpetrated by four young muslim men.
If you are so confident that the evidence supports the official version of events, why is it that you feel the need to argue so vehemently that this issue is not appropriate for inclusion in the Terms of Reference of any Independent Public Inquiry?
Whether it was intended or not, you would appear to have become the 'official voice' of the 7/7 survivors. Consequently, a simple acknowledgement on your part that, in the interests of absolute transparency, the concerns of the 7/7 research community should be addressed by an Independent Public Inquiry, might actually unite our respective groups.
After all is said and done, are we not all simply interested in ensuring that the long-established values of this country are upheld by our elected representatives?
We do not necessarily expect either you or any other survivors to agree with any of the issues or concerns raised by the 7/7 research community; we only ask that it be acknowledged that in the interests of due democratic process, that our issues and concerns should be addressed and brought to closure, by placing the appropriate irrefutable evidence in the public domain.
I take no pleasure in reviewing the way that the forum debates have evolved but just as we respect your democratic right to retain your particular view of what transpired on that fateful day; we would ask that our right to hold an alternative view be duly acknowledged.
The following is an extract from: www.julyseventh.co.uk
Each one of us deserves to know the full truth about who/what brought about the biggest loss of life in London since the Luftwaffe. Yet the authorities refuse to release a connected set of CCTV footage showing the alleged bombers in London on July 7th. Nor will they allow independent experts to check out phone, credit and computer records, or the tube, bus, Luton or Leeds forensics. In refusing an 'expensive' Judicial Inquiry the State has shown how cheap it holds the lives of Londoners.
Meanwhile we are left with no option but to conduct our own Independent People's Inquiry to find out WHAT happened on July 7th. Only then can we work out WHY it happened and how to stop it from happening again. If you have any doubts at all about the official version of events please write to your MP, the Home Office, to local and national newspapers and raise the questions that you feel need answering. We hope you may also wish to join the growing band of us who are researching collaboratively. Investigate with an open mind and remember that conspiracy theories are quite often conspiracy FACTS. For more information on 9/11 & 7/7 parallels and connections, see:
http://nineeleven.co.uk/ and http://officialconfusion.com/
The State has repeatedly proved itself to be the greatest criminal, breaking every written and natural law; killing through illegal wars and stealing from the poorest in the form of regressive taxes, increased fares, fines and living costs. Let us not forget the tragic fate of Brazilian electrician, Jean Charles de Menezes, executed at Stockwell station. Those who ask questions seek only the truth behind what happened in July. We are supposed to live in a democracy so let us hold politicians and public servants to account. Only the truth will stand the most rigorous of questioning and only liars need fear questions being asked.
In the name of Peace, Love, Truth & Justice, RELEASE THE EVIDENCE! http://julyseventh.co.uk/
The Independent People's Investigation into July Seventh
Al K Myst |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
numeral
Joined: 21 Feb 2006
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ken Livingstone on the webcast of the 7th July Review on March 1st (about a third of the way through) said something very like:.
"You could have had a power surge with a quite catastrophic casualty level. We have always been aware of that on the Underground."
http://www.london.gov.uk/assembly/webcasts.jsp
No transcript yet. I would be grateful if others could check my hearing of it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Prole
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 80
Location: London UK
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 9:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
@ Numeral yes that is exactly what he said, which supports what London Underground said in a reply to me:
| Quote: | | Again, I'm afraid it's not accurate to say that the information given about a power surge was a 'story'. When the explosions happened, obviously they broke the track circuit. On the computer systems at network control, such a big break would look the same as a power surge. It's worth pointing out that we have never been the victim of a terrorist attack of this kind before, but on 28 August 2003 a power surge knocked out about half of the network. Such a surge can be accompanied by explosions. In other words, all the evidence we had at the time (including the information from the drivers) and our experience pointed to a power surge, so that's what we said it was. This information was given in good faith. |
_________________
In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Stop watching this topic
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You can edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
You have no new messages![Log out [ The Antagonist ]](images/icon_mini_login.gif){kind=icon}
Log out [ ]
