Thursday, April 13, 2006

Milan Rai's 7/7 book launch

Milan Rai's book, '7/7, the London bombings, Islam and the Iraq war' is very good and I recommend it. It does give a sense of how it all happened, and the journey that the bombers made to get to the point of no return. Yesterday the book was officially launched.

Milan had managed to avoid being jailed earlier in the day. His crime? Reading out the names of the soldiers killed in Iraq at the Cenotaph with Maya Evans, who was arrested last year. As the 'organiser' of the 'unlawful protest' ( which consisted of two people reading out the names of the dead by the Cenotaph) Milan was arrested and charged under the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act; he was fined by Bow St Magistrates Court yesterday. He and Maya intend to appeal the decision

The official book launch, organised by Voices in the Wilderness UK, Quaker Peace and Social Witness and Justice Not Vengeance, with support from Pluto Press, was an interesting evening on 12 April with Milan, radical historian Mark Curtis, and Iraqi activist academic Nadje al-Ali and myself speaking on a panel. The room was full.

It was a shame that a small but determined band of conspiracy theorists, who had not even read the book, but who had decided that they wanted to come along and challenge it anyway, turned up and attempted to hijack the launch. They were courteously given three minutes to put their case to the floor, and their claims included *gems such as ( *taken from their leave-behind densely printed little pamphlet that they shoved at everyone later) :

*'1000 man simulations/terror exercises' going on at the time from the blasts '( debunked by C4 here)
*Claims that there were in fact TWO bombed trains with fatalities at Kings Cross ( no, there was one train, with some initial confusion as to its number)
*Talk of 'New World Order', 'globalist-facists', determination to find bizarre coincidences e.g: *'Bob Kiley was once assistant to the Director of the CIA!', claims that Mossad warned the *Israeli PM in advance of the bombs, talk of 'black ops' and 'false flag operations' and so on and so on. The predictable obsession with 9/11.
*And of course, the implacable denial that the train was suicide-bombed at all!

Unbeknownst to them, sitting in the audience was one of the drivers of the train and several fellow-survivors, three of whom were even closer to the bomb than me, as well as J and two of my friends. We exchanged wearied glances as the conspiracists ranted on. Nadje, the Iraqi academic gently pointed out to them that suicide bombing did exist, but all they could do was demand CCTV footage of the bombers actually blowing themselves up! There was no CCTV on the train, and even if there had been, it would likely have been destroyed, as the blast was powerful enough to smash through the ceiling and floor of the train, and blow the doors off, killing 26 people immediately around the bomber by the second set of double doors. Had the train been less crowded, even more would have died. To demand CCTV images of this is utterly obscene. But then these are the people whom, when faced with a survivor who has the temerity to argue with them have no comeback but to decide that I am a Government disinformation agent! Or even, a team of 'criminal spooks'! One of them shouted at me 'that Rachel had her facts all wrong'. I suppose they were not so brave as to call me a liar, in a public meeting, though they are happy to be personally abusive via the anonymity of the internet.

It was a shame that they were so disruptive, because there were many people there who had intertesting things to say and the room was full of people committed to peace, and to considering the issues of terrorism, war, foreign policy and protest. All the energy of the conspiracy theorists could be so usefully deployed in so many positive causes instead of peddling nonsense and handing out pamphlets.

But I have come to see that how they are extremist fundementalists of a kind, and it is pointless engaging with them. They cannot engage. They see the world through the prism of everything being a Giant Lie. They feel that only they, the select few have access to the Truth. Anyone who disagrees with them is a liar or the puppet of evil forces. The police, media, politicians, survivors, emergency services, are all engaged in a giant cover-up or willing dupes of the sinister forces of the New World Order, a facistic zionist cabal. Perhaps hundreds of years ago they might have been drawn to Gnosticism, or some religious cult which promotes the idea of a saved Elect with access to secret Truths in a world of corruption and lies. They are not, it strikes me, so very different in their mentality from the converts to any extremist group, though of course they are not dangerous at all.

It is quite sad, really, they are so passionate about it all but so misguided. Still, we all had a good laugh at them, and their ludicrous pamphlet down the pub afterwards. And I don't think they did themselves any favours or won themselves any converts, and J and my friends can now see who the people are who have been upsetting me with their abusive comments on this blog and their smears and lies about me on their silly website. Having read their nonsense we all agreed that they are just rather pitiful oddballs and eccentrics, and not worth bothering about. Another step forward, because now I agree, and I feel so much better now for the laughter at their expense around the pub table last night from my fellow survivors.
Sorry, I mean my fellow elite Zionist M15 Illuminati Mason lizards of the Neo-Facistic World Order. You'd better watch out. There's an awful lot of us and we're apparently taking over *wink*

P.S: There will probably be an avalanche of fruitbat anonymous comments now. If I put comment moderator on, temporarily, or disable anonymous comments, that is why. Sorry.


Blogger Justin Walker said...


Could you advise me please if you think the actor Charlie Sheen is a 'fruitbat'? Also, do you think President Chavez of Venezuela, who has just agreed to initiate a new independent inquiry into 9/11, is one as well? Also, are all the scientists and academics involved with and completely off mark?

April 13, 2006 12:33 pm  
Blogger Rachel said...

And we're out of the blocks and running! Let's see how long before I have to put comment moderator on and the personal insults go through the roof...

April 13, 2006 12:45 pm  
Blogger Justin Walker said...

Yes, Rachel, I'm out of the blocks with polite questions - and, if you care to remember, I was polite before. You seem to live in a world of extreme opposites - everything is either very black or very white and there seems to be nothing grey at all. I would appreciate an answer please to my first post.

Thank you.


April 13, 2006 2:14 pm  
Blogger Rachel said...


do you remember when I said I had no opinion on or interest in 9/11 conspiracy theories and my interest in and engagement with was wholly confined to the entirely seperate events in London July 7th?

And do you remember how you agreed and said that you understood that this wasn't a 9/11 copnspiracy theory site or words to that effect?

Well, I wish you woudl recollect that now.

7 July is not anything to do with September 11th and I can't be arsed explaining this anymore. FWIW, yes, to answer your off-topic comment, fruitbats all.

April 13, 2006 2:28 pm  
Blogger Noel said...

Is it reasonable for people who have been deemed troublemakers by the law and dealt with accordingly for having the temerity to read out the names of the dead near parliament, to announce at the beginning of a meeting that they regarded certain people in the room as trouble-makers and would be dealing with them accordingly?

Is it reasonable to disallow questions from the author of a book when that book was being quoted by one of the panelists?

It it reasonable for peace campaigners to declare that certain people are mad because they suspect they are going to express opinions which differ from yours?

If it is reasonable, what hope is there for peace?

April 13, 2006 2:39 pm  
Anonymous Felicity said...

dunno if it's reasonable or not but as a member of the meeting last night it was frustrating to see the most important issue at stake: the impact of Britain's foreign policy on national security, being sidelined by a red herring of a theory which states that the government was behind 7/7 in order to derail G8. Fact is, that whether or not 7/7 was perpetrated by young British muslims or not, the way we are behaving towards muslims as whole here and abroad is oppressive, morally indefensible and adding to a situation which is already fuelled by hate and ignorance.

April 13, 2006 3:41 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I thought your words at the meeting were brave and inspiring. I thought the views of the panel were well informed, considered, open, human and enlightened. I was incredibly glad to have attended and - although i found myself sitting in the middle of all the nutters I don't feel they overshadowed the core of the issue. Thankyou!
(Is Charlie Sheen a fruitbat? Now there's something to while away the hours with...)

April 13, 2006 5:54 pm  
Blogger Justin Walker said...


There is only one mature way out of all this unpleasantness between yourselves and ourselves. You believe the official story of 7/7 is right - we believe it was probably a false flag operation. The answer, as all believers in true democracy adhere to, is to have a formal, well organised 7/7 debate where both sides, to an agreed format, can put their points of view across and cross examine those who disagree with them. No heckling, no rudeness, just a decent uplifting debate where our democracy and all our rights to freedom of speech win out.

How about it? You are convinced of your stance - we of ours. I throw down the gauntlet (in a nice way I assure you) and let such a mature and reasonable debate take place.

I look forward to hopefully your positive response to this.

Best wishes


April 13, 2006 7:28 pm  
Anonymous seer said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

April 14, 2006 3:53 am  
Anonymous seer said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

April 14, 2006 4:01 am  
Blogger TheTruthMan said...


London is already known as Londonistan and has been for years, because 1) in the 19th Century British Intelligence through a guy called Hempher created the strain of Islam called Wahhabism for the very purpose it is being used for now; terrorism, and 2) we have allowed it grow in London so it had somewhere to grow and could be influenced and watched.

Justin, be prepared for some verbal abuse. Rachel has been through a hell of alot and as she has pointed out 7/7 survivors have received bugger all help from the government to get over the stress and shock. It doesn't help our case either when others, possibly MI5 agents provocateur, accuse of her of being an MI5 agent herself. I can believe that some MI5 are posing as bloggers and protestors at meetings, trying to influence events, but I don't think Rachel is.

It is rather odd though that there are all these bloggers calling for a full, open public discussion and inquiry and accuse the government of secrecy etc, but when the likes of you and I try to inject some differing point of view from theirs the name-calling begins, there are even suggestions of shipping us off to a remote desert island, and discussion of our point of view is lost in the outcry in having a differing point of view.

Take my treatment. I do not accuse Rachel of being MI5 and have never called her anything, only wished her the best in getting the inquiry she and we want and deserve, but despite saying I don't believe in "the lizards" whenever I post "the lizards" are brought forth to paint me as some sort of turquoise-wearing-David-Icke-worshipping freak (which I am not). I can accept the goading from Rachel. This is her blog and is probably still suffering some stress and shock due to lack of aftercare. But this does not excuse the others.

There is very strong circumstantial evidence that 7/7 was allowed to happen; we were first told the alleged leader Kahn was a 'clean skin' but we now know he was watched after returning from a terrorist training camp, and that his name was passed to MI5 shortly before 7/7 linked to a plot to bomb the London Underground. Kahn was left alone. Meanwhile anti-terrorism laws are used to arrest hecklers, and as Rachel Ehrenfeld pointed out shortly after 7/7 there are several Islamic Fundamentalist publications published here in the UK available via mail order that incite terrorism and suicide bombings. They have been left alone to publish their views, while Milan Rai is arrested!

Plus as Rachel has experienced, the survivors of 7/7 received no aftercare from the government, but the same government is perfectly prepared to use 7/7 to enable some pretty serious Police State laws AND not have a full, independent inquiry.

Armed with this knowledge how the suggestion that 7/7 was a 'false flag operation' can be dismissed with such speed and verbal abuse is beyond me.

Or is it?

April 14, 2006 7:28 am  
Blogger steve said...

Sounds like the book launch was fun.
re: conspiranutters.
Same old problem: they believe what they want and there is no convincing them oherwise. Just ignore them, some are worse than others. Problem is whenever I go on a conspiracy site instead of finding research backed facts I find hypothesis and fantasy. A complete ignorance of the facts, usually mixed in with a large amount of anti-semitic remarks. If there was anything in any of these theories it would be revealed by serious scientists and reseachers, not some joe public conspiranutter!
They don't get it!

April 14, 2006 11:08 am  
Anonymous contrition said...

fjl said:

If there is a serious, interesting conspiracy, perhaps more sensibly phrased as 'confederate group inside a department that have oversteppe their security remit and committed a crime', then it needs careful handling ...

fjl, you never cease to amaze me. Are you really saying the 7th July crimes were committed by a rogue group inside a Britsh security organisation?

April 14, 2006 12:33 pm  
Blogger fjl said...

No, I say the opposite.
It's quite clear that there were four men in the videos, and that these were suicide bombers, who committed the murder. Rachel is correct. As to how this was allowed to occur, that's a point of police research interest, apparently, but it is not my specific remit. My reference refers to my historical research, and the confederacies of 1888.

April 14, 2006 12:37 pm  
Blogger Numeral said...

fjl wrote:

No, I say the opposite.
It's quite clear that there were four men in the videos, and that these were suicide bombers, who committed the murder. Rachel is correct. As to how this was allowed to occur, that's a point of police research interest, apparently, but it is not my specific remit. My reference refers to my historical research, and the confederacies of 1888.

OK, do you go for LIHOP (let it happen on purpose) or MIHOP (made it happen on purpose)? Were the Photoshopped Four just allowed to do it or were they helped?

April 14, 2006 12:50 pm  
Anonymous Neal said...

@ fjl

It's quite clear that there were four men in the videos, and that these were suicide bombers, who committed the murder.

Could you tell me which videos you refer to? As far as I am aware, video footage of any/all of the four men from that day has never been made available.

April 14, 2006 1:15 pm  
Blogger TheTruthMan said...

Rachel and

on my blog I've just posted a brief summary of what has happened and how it was financed. It's called "A PRIMER IN CONSPIRALOONACY (and it's lizard-free!)".

The potential for being called 'anti-semitic' has already surfaced, and I expect such accusations to be made. But before making those accusations I ask readers to read the section on Israel on my website.

Right, it's Easter holidays and it's very nice outside.


April 14, 2006 1:32 pm  
Blogger fjl said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

April 14, 2006 1:59 pm  
Anonymous contrition said...


I am sorry. I didn't mean to incur your wrath. But you did say:

confederate group inside a department that have oversteppe their security remit and committed a crime

This does seem to rule out incompetence or lack of resources as the reason that the London explosions managed to occur.

I hope all this does not prevent you being so deliciously indiscreet in future.

April 14, 2006 2:48 pm  
Anonymous Neal said...

I come here to chat with one or two interesting people, I am not here to answer snooping & imbecile questions.

Hi - was that comment directed at me? I only asked which videos you meant - I have never seen any video footage of the men that day. If it is available, perhaps someone who knows could supply me with a link so I can find out about this?

April 14, 2006 6:30 pm  
Anonymous Contrition said...


The penny has dropped. How difficult it is to communicate, even between kindred spirits such as ourselves! You were talking about events in 1888.

Obviously, the new dogs have forgotten the tricks of the old dogs and no longer commit crimes.

Do they still talk about 1888 in the police canteens?

April 14, 2006 11:43 pm  
Blogger Rachel said...

Comment moderator is now enabled after some far-right conspiracy theories were posted which I found to be inciting of racial hatred.

Conspiracists do keep some lovely company.

April 15, 2006 7:40 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I dunno, I just think one can obsess all one likes over an event that impacted on one's own life not at all and in the process make one of the survivor's life even more difficult but sometimes one really should just get out of the house and meet girls. Or at least go back to one's pornography.

April 16, 2006 12:04 pm  
Anonymous Rich said...


I am more interested in the after effects of 7/7 rather than the conspiracy debate you are currently engaged in. I am interested in obtaining a copy of the book as i am writing my dissertation at uni on 'the impact of the war on terror on british minority citizens' - The latter part of my study is based on the legislation introduced by the government as a result of 7/7 and how it has impacted society.
I have reseached journal and broadsheet newspaper articles to try and gather evidence and a substantial amount of this does infer that the anti-terror legislation has infringed on some important fundamental elements of the UN Human Rights decalration.
Anyways my question is what do you think of the anti-terror legislation and what do you think should be done to improve the situation?

April 16, 2007 2:21 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


I hate to point out the obvious. David Shayler is a "former" MI5 agent. The use of provacateurs is a fairly common covert op technique.

One of the lead figures in the 9/11 Truth Movement, who says things as insane as David Shayler is a "former" CIA agent. (He has hinted that no planes hit the towers.) I would ignore them both.

I don't know if MI5 had any involvement in the bombings, but if anyone says there were no bombs, they don't deserve a response. The fact that one of the lead people making such a wild claim is a former MI5 agent raises questions for me.

August 13, 2007 4:07 pm  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home