Monday, January 29, 2007

John Reid replies:

The currently beleagured John Reid has been passed the J7 Truth Campaign letter to Tony Blair and this is his reply:



(click to read)

Are we to assume from this that on 11/7/05, the 'information that was available at the time' was that at least two of the trains were travelling towards Kings Cross? Did this information only change to fit the story of 4 men travelling from Kings Cross?

John Reid and Tony Blair need to explain why this information was wrong in the first place, after all, 4 days should be enough time to know in which direction the trains were travelling and from which stations. It is insulting to the victims' families, the survivors and the British public that Mr Blair's first statement to the House - one which appears on the website of 10 Downing Street - should contain such ludicrous errors, just as the Official Report published by the Home Office claimed that the 4 men travelled on the 7.40 Luton train that was cancelled and never ran on 7th July 2005, an error for which we have yet to receive any explanation.

(As for the motto the Home Office have the nerve to print on the bottom of their correspondence 'building a safe, just and tolerant society' I think not).

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

Glad to see you posting again Bridget. And huge respect for not giving up the fight to get the FACTS of that day established and for starting this investigation in the early days.

I have nothing other than true astonishment, that the politicans display their contentedness towards a bunch of unfactual, impossible, and contradictory fairy tales as being a sufficient effort to account for that day, and to do grant justice to those who dies on that day, and to their surviving friends and relatives.

I cannot come to terms with the fact that that those who are supposed to work for our benefit, behave in are so such a grossly insensitivite and negligent fashion.

I mean, what is happening with the UK is the kind of thing we used to think was what happened in Chilie under Pinochet or Stalinist Russia.

What happened?

LSF said...

Speaking as a survivor, I'm glad you're posting but I wish you'd ask more sensible questions. The aftermath of the bombings was difficult. Organised chaos at best and the information available reflected that. Blair might just have read the stations in that order as that's how someone wrote them down. And whilst I guess you could argue (as you've done) that the direction of the trains is implied by his statement, someone else could argue that you're reading too much into it. Please contine writing - but do focus on what is important - and Blair's statement in the aftermath of the bombings isn't.

Bridget Dunne said...

lsf

I have attempted to stick to ascertaining the facts that are so woefully missing, inadequate or plainly false.

I try not to speculate on motive or reasons for why these statements are erroneous, such as the one on the Downing St website, preferring to ask those who made them the reasons why they did so. Stating that one of the trains was travelling between Aldgate East and Liverpool Street some 5 days later, is important. Not only does it imply that the train was travelling towards and not away from KX but also involves a totally different line/station to the one we have been told the train was travelling on and between, Liverpool St and Aldgate. How was this information wrong in the first place, why weren't the facts checked?

I personally find it insulting, so how do the victim's families feel when the train their loved ones were said to be on is wrong in statements such as then one Tony Blair made to Parliament?

As a survivor, what are the important questions that you feel and think need answering?

Anonymous said...

I've found out that Rachel "North" is utilizing bootlicking Blairwatch admins to hunt down FJL. FJL used to write here. From your experiences of FJL do you think the claims Northy makes are justified cos FJL seemed ok to me.

Bridget Dunne said...

Hi anonymous

Yes fjl would leave the odd comment or two and she was never a fan of the truth campaign, as is her right.

I'd rather not comment on the grotesque vindictive witch hunt that certain 'liberal progressive' blogs have sunk to. But hey, when there's a book to publicise (Out of the Tunnel July 6th)any publicity is good publicity.

My concern is the implication for bloggers amid the calls for fjl's blog to be taken off line by google and the consequences for the last sanctuary of freedom of speech.

Anonymous said...

There's a difference between free speech and blogs that knowingly make up vile and false accusations against people to try to cover up one's own criminal activities.

Bridget Dunne said...

@ Anonymous

My observation of how the 'lynching' of fjl would aid sales of a certain book is borne out with this headline:
Raped, blown up... Then stalked by a maniac - the most remarkable 7/7 survivor of all

I doubt whether more than a handful of people ever read fjl's blog, until it received the massive publicity associated with the grotesque and revolting lynch-mob campaign.

As someone who has been on the receiving end of various false and vindictive claims, made on more widely read forums than one strange lady's blog, by the very 'victim' in this case, the hypocrisy surrounding the allegations are breathtaking.

Emails can be blocked and ignored as can blogs btw and to my mind do not constitute stalking, cyber or real.

'Stalked by a maniac?' - Really? Can fjl really be classified a 'maniac'?

Talking of falsehoods, I wonder what you make of these two survivor accounts of leaving the train at Russell Square within 3 - 4 minutes? Contradicts the version told by the 'most remarkable 7/7 survivor of all' don't you think?

Russell Square eye-witness testimony

More here:

King's Cross - Russell Square incident analysis

fjl said...

Hi, thanks for this. I didn't see it before.

Peter said...

Jail three times for harassment and still continuing, with not an atom of self-awareness? Home reposessed, declared bankrupt, six months in prison this year and still she goes on, remorselessly, with no modifcation of her behaviour? I think that fjl can certainly be described as a maniac, yes. At best, mentally ill, but also just plain ol' bad.

fjl said...

Another visit full of libel from a stalking ripperologist. Like I said, it's best to ignore them.

Anonymous said...

It looks like a Rachel comment.

fjl said...

No, it's a blasted ripperologist. I have never been so sick of a bunch of people in my life.

Why they do not have the dignity to just clear off I Cannot Fathom.

Jenny said...

Nice post about rape by fjl on her blog. fjlathome2.blogspot.com. So, according to her, rape victims should put up and shup up.

So that is all right then.

Classy mate you have got yourself there.