Democratic? No public enquiry on the 7/7 bombings.

[Jazzz]

Just leave it Jazzz. People who have been involved in such a horrific incident deserve better than you trying to belittle and twist their experiences to fit your conspiracy-filled view of the world.

And this was the point. When someone who was involved in such a horrific incident was accused of making it all up to get attention, it was pretty much only me that stood up for her. I find that a considerable irony. Yet, it seems I am accused of invalidating people's experiences when not true at all.

urban75 should be neither Jazzz's conspiracy hour (thank you), nor the badger kitten show, nor any such monothought clique. It should be a place where differing opinions and points of view are respected.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

It should be a place where differing opinions and points of view are respected.

If you want respect you should show some, if you want respect you have to have some credibility. You and your loony tunes brigade of delusional idiots distract from the very real and important work of dissent that others are attempting to bring to these boards.

 

[Prole]

Homemade: stank of peroxide and nail polish remover smell.

This is the first witness report that I have ever read of this kind of smell on the trains from the explosive, and I've read a lot of them during my research.

On here and on another blog you report that Germaine Lindsey was identified by a fellow passenger.

I tell you what. I don't give a stuff how the bombers got to Kings Ctross but I can tell you for a fact that Germaine Lindsey was on my train, and that a bomb went off in carriage one.

I can vouch for the fact that Germaine Lindsey got onto my train at Kings Cross because one of the passengers who was also on carriage one with me TRIED TO GET ON BEHIND HIM and couldn't,because the carriage was rammed, so went to the next carriage.

I am just wondering how being behind someone can then lead to a positive identification of anything other than the back of someone's head. Also if the carriage was rammed and the fellow passenger had to get on the next carriage, I'm wondering how he could have been on carriage one with you.

editor: Look, you blithering fruitspud, loonpie idiot: 'historical precendent' is NOT, repeat NOT "hard evidence" for any of the bonkers conspiraloon drivel being posted up about the 7th July

I am new to this forum and was unaware that the role of a moderator was to either take sides or use such inflammatory language.

 

[editor]

I have since met Sue, she's perfectly normal, in fact far more normal than most urbanites.

That kind of stupid statement just tells me it's not worth reading any more of your post.

And what the fuck has an ex-poster's comments about a completely unrelated incident got to do with this thread?

 

[Jazzz]

I am new to this forum and was unaware that the role of a moderator was to either take sides or use such inflammatory language.

 

[shoddysolutions]

urban75 should be neither Jazzz's conspiracy hour (thank you), nor the badger kitten show, nor any such monothought clique.

BINGO!

 

[shoddysolutions]

I am new to this forum and was unaware that the role of a moderator was to either take sides or use such inflammatory language.

Welcome to urban!

 

[Techno303]

BINGO!

Arf!

 

[editor]

I am new to this forum and was unaware that the role of a moderator was to either take sides or use such inflammatory language.

Perhaps if you'd bothered to read the fucking thread you'd see that I was responding to the poster's unprovoked insult.

Or do you think moderators are supposed to take insults and abuse from obsessed conspiracy types and not respond?

 

[editor]

BINGO!

Tee hee!

And, just for the hell of it....

 

[tarannau]

Everyone got it wrong. With the notable of one witness: <real name removed: editor>, who described 'at least ten shots' in her statement to the IPCC. This extraordinary amount was certainly not public information. We now know from that coroner's report that there were eleven shots in all. There is simply no way she could have known this, unless she was there.

On this fact alone we can conclude that <real name removed: editor> was genuine, and that is what I did.
.
Soon after getting booted off here she offered to show me her copy of the IPCC statement. She also offered to take me to the Stockwell nursery where she had to recover immediately after the shooting. I needed neither.

Sue T. has a look at this thread. She says;
I'm beginning to wonder about her comment. I really love urban, it's been good to me. But well certainly, if urban75 is to turn into the 'badger kitten show'...

FWIW, I thought Sue T got a little bit of a hard time on here. I'd like to think that I was fair to her, encouraging her to complain about the police based on the belief that you should give someone the benefit of the doubt until proved otherwise. I'm still not convinced of whether she was genuine or not - there were aspects to her tale that didn't ring true to me, but I couldn't really tell.

Either way and there's nothing to prove Sue was or wasn't at the station to this day. Alleging 'over 10' shots certainly does not verify her tale, nor her attendance at the scene, even by your ever-changing standard of evidence (pick at any minute inconsistency in the official account, be massively forgiving of the gaping holes in your own version of events)

And fuck off with the 'Badger kitten show' nonsense eh. Show a little respect. She may not grandly talk about being a 'truth seeker,' but it's fair to say she's got a personal involvement in the affair, not a desperate compulsion to manufacture yet another conspiracy as a bizarre hobby...

 

[Jazzz]

That kind of stupid statement just tells me it's not worth reading any more of your post.

And what the fuck has an ex-poster's comments about a completely unrelated incident got to do with this thread?

Central to this whole thread is badger kitten's repeated insistence that anyone who doesn't accept the official narrative is invalidating her experience. Which they aren't.

I think it is well worth pointing out that when a trauma victim in a very similar position to badger kitten (if not actually physically hurt) WAS really accused of making it all up, I stuck my neck out to defend her.

This defensive post of yours appears to finally concede the issue of ST's genuineness, which would be about time. Even at this stage, an apology would not be amiss.

Maybe you can find it in your heart to make that apology, as she encountered considerable distress due to her treatment here.

 

[editor]

FWIW, I thought Sue T got a little bit of a hard time on here.

For the record, I wasn't here when all that stuff kicked off (I was away in St Ives) but I certainly received enough emails, phone calls and PMs to suggest that there were grounds for doubt.

 

[editor]

This defensive post of yours appears to finally concede the issue of Sue Thomason's genuineness, which would be about time. Even at this stage, an apology would not be amiss..

Stop trying to change the subject with your irrelevant, point scoring bullshit please.

But if you want to apologise for all the fact-free delusional bullshit you've posted here, freel free.

 

[butchersapron]

barriers.

Everyone got it wrong. With the notable of one witness: <real name removed: editor>, who described 'at least ten shots' in her statement to the IPCC. This extraordinary amount was certainly not public information. We now know from that coroner's report that there were eleven shots in all. There is simply no way she could have known this, unless she was there.

Is this the same ST who reported JCDM as holding a gun when he entered the tube carriage and which he then used to take other passengers hostage? That one?

 

[Badger Kitten]

This is the first witness report that I have ever read of this kind of smell on the trains from the explosive, and I've read a lot of them during my research.

What are you implying? What the fuck are you implying? Come on, out with it

Want to call me a liar?

On here and on another blog you report that Germaine Lindsey was identified by a fellow passenger

.

I am just wondering how being behind someone can then lead to a positive identification of anything other than the back of someone's head. Also if the carriage was rammed and the fellow passenger had to get on the next carriage, I'm wondering how he could have been on carriage one with you.

Read the fucking post you tiresome woman. Jamie queued behind Lindsey, jostled next to him to get on the train, put his foot in door, gave up, turned round , got in carriage 2 instead.

I call you: troll.

 

[Jazzz]

For the record, I wasn't here when all that stuff kicked off (I was away in St Ives) but I certainly received enough emails, phone calls and PMs to suggest that there were grounds for doubt.

And this is the way small-town gossip works, editor. You can have plenty of smoke with absolutely no fire at all. This was the case with <real name removed: editor>.

I note you are now distancing yourself from the whole affair yourself. Now that we have finally established the truth here, I invite you to make an apology to Sue. It is certainly much deserved.

And yes, her account of the number of shots does establish that she was there - barring some extraordinary evidence to the contrary.

 

[Prole]

You can call me what you like, I'll add that name to the list thanks.
I quoted your own comment when you said:

I can vouch for the fact that Germaine Lindsey got onto my train at Kings Cross because one of the passengers who was also on carriage onewith me TRIED TO GET ON BEHIND HIM and couldn't, because the carriage was rammed, so went to the next carriage.

I'm not calling anyone a liar, this isn't the school playground.
As for the smell of peroxide and nail polish remover, I just commented that I have never read a witness statement that has mentioned this smell previously.

 

[Badger Kitten]

26 posts with one obsessive agenda. Pushing her blog with one agenda. I say Prole came on here with the aim of causing trouble, she's already posted on my blog and I answered her questions there.

I may have it in for conspiracy theorists, and I will tell you why, I have seen the original u75 post quoted to ''prove'' it was power surges and no bomb went off on a conspiracy site. I have answered conspiracy theorist questions politely, then with increasing anger as my answers are twisted or wilfully ignored. I am fucking fed up of it, and in this thread, you have 5 months of me finally saying so.

I started a petition to get a public enquiry.


and clearly I am/was involved with this subject and this site - urban was the first place I came when it all happened. But I don't just post on u75 about the 7th July, I like it here and I enjoy the threads, even if they get heated. This is not the 'badger kitten show', piss off.

But you claim to seek the truth and then you come across - or seek out - someone who was actually there and can answer questions sensibly - as I have tried to do - like when the bomb went off - and what the smoke smelt like - and whether Lindsey was on the train - and you don't fucking well want to know.


Nor will you answer questions about your motivations or your own theories.

What does that tell you? What the fuck does that tell you about yourselves, you...so -called truth -seekers?

Liars? Agenda-ists? Fantasists? Ghouls?

Truth seekers?

My arse.

 

[tarannau]

I note you are now distancing yourself from the whole affair yourself. Now that we have finally established the truth here, I invite you to make an apology to Sue. It is certainly much deserved.
.

Er, no we haven't established anything of the sort. No wonder why we worry about the accuracy of your conspiracy tall tales.

Jazzz's mental reasoning seems to go: He sounds a 'bit defensive to me, therefore I'm right - Sue was there after all, IT'S A CONSPIRACY I TELL YOU.'

Nothing has come close to proving Sue was there as yet. The ten shots line would have sounded far more convincing had I not heard a similar number described from the gossip of the nearby Skate park near immediately after the events ('Someone shot, loads of shots more than 10'.) To be honest, I put it out of mind - it's the Brixton grapevine after all - and didn't really concern myself with the apparent inconsistency in the media accounts.

There's nothing to suggest that Sue was or wasn't there, or if she was a particularly creditworthy witness. She could have been, she could simply have overheard gossip nearby, or even simply taken a guess. It's not as though her other evidence was faultless by any means - IIRC Sue was convinced that she was being attacked by middle eastern gunmen or something similar at the time.

The fact that you're so desperate to take her account at face value is at least as unwise as those who dismissed her account out of hand. In fact, it's probably worse - I suspect the mods and others may have extra information before reaching their decision. Either way - even if she was there - it's an irrelevancy to this particular thread and just further evidence of your desperate need to manipulate any 'fact,' inconsistency or individual witness to fit your version of events and suit your latest conspiracy crusade.

Badger Kitten wants an enquiry, you want one. I suspect BK wants closure, you just want another 'official' document to pick holes in and rage against...

 

[editor]

And this is the way small-town gossip works, editor. You can have plenty of smoke with absolutely no fire at all.

This is absolutely priceless stuff from the uncrowned king of repeating overheard rumours, source-free tittle-tattle and 'found on the internet' yarns!!

Oh, I believe butchers has asked you a question above. Care to answer it?

 

[Jazzz]

26 posts with one obsessive agenda. Pushing her blog with one agenda. I say Prole came on here with the aim of causing trouble, she's already posted on my blog and I answered her questions there.

I may have it in for conspiracy theorists, and I will tell you why, I have seen the original u75 post quoted to ''prove'' it was power surges and no bomb went off on a conspiracy site.

You have now mentioned this at least four times (maybe more, I'm not sure). Yet it has absolutely nothing to do with anyone here. I do hope you are not trying to put words in other people's mouths by force of repetition.

I started a petition to get a public enquiry.

We applaud you for that and many here have signed. Maybe you will realise that as members of the public, we are on the same side.

When I defended ST here, against the very accusations that you are untruthfully making against you, you accused me of 'stirring'. In addition to inviting editor finally making the necessary apology in that regard, I wonder what comment you know have to make towards your fellow urbanite who was a trauma victim in the recent terror episodes and to me.

I will concede my comment about the 'badger kitten show' was a churlish one.

 

[editor]

But you claim to seek the truth and then you come across - or seek out - someone who was actually there and can answer questions sensibly - as I have tried to do - like when the bomb went off - and what the smoke smelt like - and whether Lindsey was on the train - and you don't fucking well want to know.

Standard procedure for conspiraloons, I'm afraid. They're not interested in the truth.

Instead, they want to be part of the brave 'truth seekers' uncovering some fantastic conspiracy that us mere mortals are too stupid/too terminally gullible/too brainwashed to see for ourselves.

The media is always full of lies and cover ups (unless they find something which appears to back up their wild claims, in which case the information becomes an unchallengable authority), and anyone questioning their evidence-unsupported claims is immediately dismissed as being some sort of government-supporting stooge.

It's really quite sad.

 

[Pickman's model]

<real name removed: editor> was the barking one we had a few months ago? she was a pint short of a gallon...

 

[sparticus]

Look, you blithering fruitspud, loonpie idiot: 'historical precendent' is NOT, repeat NOT "hard evidence" for any of the bonkers conspiraloon drivel being posted up about the 7th July. That is what you claimed you could provide.

(Not that there's any historical precedent for the government bombing tube trains with pretend suicide bombers, of course.)

Care to show me where I said this and what was the theory I was claiming to have hard evidence for exactly.

And I never claimed there was "any historical precedent for the government bombing tube trains with pretend suicide bombers", what I claimed was that there is hard evidence of agents of HMG infiltrating and colluding with terrorists and we are talking recent history not burning witches.

Given you don't like personal insults, I suggest you lay off the blithering fruitspud insults. It's not big and it's not clever.

 

[Jazzz]

Oh, I believe butchers has asked you a question above. Care to answer it?

Yes. That you are now hanging onto an ordinary poster's suggestion that 'we can't say for sure' shows precisely that you now have no evidence to suggest she wasn't genuine.

If you can't say for sure, you don't go around accusing people of lying - lest you be heinously insulting a trauma victim.

There is no evidence to suggest <real name removed: editor> wasn't genuine. None that stood up, anyway.

She was the only witness to give an accurate account of the number of shots to the IPCC. This wasn't some gossip in a skate park; she was putting her reputation on line by commiting herself to her testimony - since then, other witnesses have been exposed as not being credible. Yet she comes out with flying colours.

It's very simple. She was there. Which is why she came here, and went to the IPCC.

A trauma victim here, on your board editor, was accused of being a 'narcissistic confabulator'. This is not something you should take lightly. You cannot go around saying, 'well she might have been making it all up'. She wasn't.

In trying to stand up for her, I've had to cut through the most astounding barrage of nonsense. I put myself on the line by doing so. You should now seek to rectify the situation. This is the decent thing to do when a miscarriage of justice occurs.

To read posts like butchersapron's now is sickening and simply unacceptable. If I was to airlily muse, 'I can't say whether badger kitten was really there, she might have been making it all up' would that be right and fair? Of course not. (Just to clarify, I AM NOT SAYING THAT).

Your apology and restoration of the insult to <removed: ed> reputation is long overdue.

 

[editor]

Care to show me where I said this and what was the theory I was claiming to have hard evidence for exactly.

I asked you to you admit that you didn't have "a single, solitary shred of hard evidence to support any of the wild theories being spouted by conspiraloons about 7th July."

You refused, so I assumed that was because you actually had some hard evidence - so feel free to produce it now!

Looking forward to it!

 

[butchersapron]

To read posts like butchersapron's now is sickening and simply unacceptable. If I was to airlily muse, 'I can't say whether badger kitten was really there, she might have been making it all up' would that be right and fair? Of course not. (Just to clarify, I AM NOT SAYING THAT).

What do mean by this? I put it directly to ST at the time.

 

[Badger Kitten]

Irrelevant crap deleted as not pertinent to thread about a 7th July public enquiry

 

[editor]

Your apology and restoration of the insult to Sue Thomason's reputation is long overdue.

I'm afraid her 'reputation' here was all of her own making.

I wasn't even contributing to the boards at the time, so you can't even whine and blame me for it either!

Why do you think so many people had problems with her posts here? Any idea?