Headlines
Shock as panic stricken Londoners realise electrical power surges cannot be responsible for such horror.
July 7th 2005
8.51am - At the height of the morning rush hour London's tube network is rocked by 3 bombs.
The survivors wait in darkness for 30 minutes before being escorted to safety by transport staff.
Author Daniel Obachike - Front Page News
3 blasts rock London's tube network - 1 hour later the 4th bomb kills 13 passengers on a red London bus.
Survivor and eye witness Daniel on the front cover of a national newspaper.
MI5 Head Resigns over 7:7 Failings
December 2006 - Shock throughout MI5 at its chief Manningham-Buller's resignation after details of its hand in the London bus bombing leak onto the worldwide web via The4thBomb.com website.
Headlines
Terror as panic stricken Londoners realise electrical power surges cannot be responsible for such horror.
July 7th 2005
8.51am - At the height of the morning rush hour London's tube network is rocked by 3 bomb blasts.
The survivors wait in darkness for 30 minutes before being escorted to safety by transport staff.
i love how this article is befret of any evidence to back up what you’re saying. I’m in the we are change manchester group, and i can assure you you’re talking out of you’re arse. You clearly have nothing to write about so out of boredom have to decided to throw about unfounded allegations…or, considering you’ve named names, from a legal persepective this could be considered slander!
Stacey, get Gareth Newnham to speak up for We Are Change UK. As a member of their fan club in Manchester you have no bearing upon the facts. There’s mountains of evidence from a number of sources, (one being MI6). Its been open knowledge for 2 years. It’s another case of people who work for the secret services crying foul when their perceived secrecy is compromised.
I salute the tremendous work Luke Radkowski and the real We Are Change US contuinues to do.
Well, you’ve just gone and proved Stacy’s point Daniel. She asked for one ounce of proof to support your very serious and libellous allegations. You then went ahead and made, without one ounce of proof, futher serious and libellous allegations.
So can you please give one speckticle, iota, or even nanoiota of evidence for these claims?
I doubt anyone in We Are Change London would bother dignifying this with a response.
Where are your “mountains of evidence”?
Why not start simple with just a *single* piece of evidence?
Just one reason for anyone out there to take this as anything other than slightly desperate mud-slinging. Can you manage that? Or is innuendo as far as you are able to go?
Also – Stacey is right – this is libel, so you’d better have something to back it up with…
Point 1 – Something can only be libel if it is a lie, not simply because you disagree with it.
Point 2 – The last MOD member I named in a court case brought against me was questioned by detectives but ultimately was forbidden from answering any charges, claims or accusations for obvious reasons, so the case against me was struck from the courts records. So I’d be intrigued to see Andy Baker and any of his M.O.D colleauges bringing a libel charge.
Daniel,
In a libel case it is up to you to prove your claims
Wrong, Lawyer (obviously not a lawyer). It is up to the injured party to prove libel.
“Law Lord” is wrong Daniel.
It is up to the person making the accusation to prove it is true. Here is a basic guide to libel law in the UK:
http://www.urban75.org/info/libel.html
“In the UK, if someone thinks that what you wrote about them is either defamatory or damaging, the onus will be entirely on you to prove that your comments are true in court. In other words, if you make the claim, you’ve got to prove it! ”
But “libel” is really not the point; I don’t think anyone is going to bother going to court over this.
The point is: what purpose does your blog serve it it makes statements about people without any evidence or argument provided to back them up?
Who but a simpleton would read the above and agree with you that these people work for the MOD since you have provided them no reason to. Unless you are going to explain why or how you know this, the assumption will always be that you are just making stuff up.
And I’m sorry Daniel, but I think you are.
i tried leaving two responses on here before and they don’t seem to have come up for some reason??
have you ever stopped to think you may be playing right into the powers that be’s hands by attacking members of your own cause? maybe this is what they want?? as david icke would put it…
problem-Mi5 has infiltrated we are change uk
reaction-anger, distrust
solution-attack their own
until i’ve seen some real evidence, i’m really not convinced.
i’d also like to add i’m an assistant organiser for we are change manchester, it’s not a ‘fan club’ as you put it in an attempt to belittle our efforts. We should be united and supporting one anothers work, not attacking it without yet providing sufficient proof. If people are going to write articles such as this they should be able to provide a legitimate amount of evidence to state the case.
I wrote this before, along with many other points, however my posts never made it up on here, for some unknown reason.
Keep up the good work, assistant organiser. I’m sure your heart is in the right place.
I think this topic warrants a new post.
Come on Daniel, I asked you before, yes I really do want to know what the evidence is, this is why I asked the question in the first place. So what is the evidence? Can you provide one speck of it?
According to LawLord’s advice, I’ll keep the evidence until a trial is brought.
indeed i will… =)
and as part of my ‘work’…i am still intrigued as to where this evidence is? i’m really interested to see now…
considering our group associates with these supposed mod’s, i think we should be thoroughly informed.
This is an INCREDIBLY serious allegation but not an entirely implausable one, it would explain the pitifully low level of political activity in the UK relating to their stated issues; there is a marked absence of even an awareness of them, among even politically active. The UK relies almost entirely on the US organisations for information. It would also explain how they were nearly able to citizens arrest the head of Mi6 without being shot.
Have you raised this with the US WeAreChange groups or Alex Jones and the Infowars lot? Maybe you should go on the show again and call them (WeAreChangeUK) out, or at least email Aaron, RobD or Paul Watson.
Of course its serious,
I first met these guys at the Uk 911 & 7/7 Truth meetings held at the Counting House Pub in London. After penetrating the organisation and gaining the trust of its members some of them broke away to form We Are Change UK riding on the good name that We Are Change had established in the States. They have gained considerable influence holding headline events and flying big U.S names to the U.K. The 911 group run on a shoestring withered allowing We Are Change UK (MOD) to then steer the agenda for the truth Movement in the UK arranging meetings, showing up at protests, focusing on the same 911 preoccupations while avoiding any mention of 7/7.
I haven’t seen any other group try and question Peter Power, your claim they do nothing re 7/7 is laughable
Lawyer… You illustrate my point nicely.
The J7 group: (www.julyseventh.co.uk) was set up in September 2005. Its researchers first raised questions about Peter Power even trying to contact him in the months following the attacks. Of course he did not respond keeping his head down.
In 2008 Peter Power stepped back in the media spotlight, playing down Visor consultants role and being heckled by We Are Change UK (unsurprisingly) so newbies like Stacey and yourself believe We Are Change UK are ‘truthseekers’ in the mould of Alex Jones and Luke Radkowski when the voice of groups that actually recieved MOD threats after researching and asking too many probing questions have been silenced.
Fortunately J7 left an online resource:
http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-terror-rehearsal.html
Oh and by the way Daniel. Once libel has been pointed out and it continues, this becomes aggravated libel
I was outside the Bank of England today, WeAreChangeUK weren’t, funny that. It would be slightly more convincing, than demonstrating their curious level of low cost access to prominent figures in the intelligence services, if they did something tangable, perhaps even demonstrate; graphic design doesn’t really cut it. Hiding behind libel, really doesn’t help your case. Those are the tactics of the enemy, are you the enemy?
We Are Change London WERE at the Bank of England yesterday. 90% of the people there were dancing round the We Are Change London soundsystem.
Regarding your comment about access to prominent figures in the security services you’ll find such information is available to anyone who can use Google e.g. http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/events/view/-/id/818/
Daniel Obachike doesn’t have ANY evidence that We Are Change London are ‘MOD’ and he has completely discredited himself.
i know gareth – he isnt an MOD agent! be careful before you end up going crazy like david icke
I’m sure you know Gareth, but what does that prove?
Why are you trying to distance Gareth from Andy Baker?
Is it because I’ve already exposed the connection on Facebook?
i dont know andy that well, but i have no reason to believe he is an MOD agent – if he is, prove it to me and I will happily change my stance on the subject.
What have you exposed Daniel? Come on, we all want to know WHY it is we should believe you.
What is the evidence behind your claims?
He’s been asked for evidence many many times, but has said that he is not going to reveal it until a “court case”. See above:
“According to LawLord’s advice, I’ll keep the evidence until a trial is brought.”
So, in short, he has no evidence that he is going to mention, he is just going to continue making libellous allegations with zero basis.
Gullible people will believe him, sensible people (the majority of those posting it seems) will just laugh.
M
wearechange has been infiltrated in the UK? I’ll have to learn more about this…thanks for the post.
On the Noam Chomsky point, I wouldnt be too worried about people sighting Noam Chomsky’s remarks, his opinion can easily be debunked itself, as Griffin has done. He also said that a Government cant keep a secret, patently false itself, although the put options on united airlines etc show otherwise anyway! Chumpsky also says even if the Government had committed murder it is of no significance. Those who reside with Chomsky on this issue lack their own critical thinking. of course it has significance. chomsky does not debunk, rather he puts up reasons to marginalise an alternative theory to avoid looking at truths which proove him wrong, just like many I have spoken to. We need a new news media, non journalist reporters, etc.
A friend of mine said yesterday that any new newspaper would have to cater for all tastes, I told him that is the business of selling news, not reporting it. Perhaps Noam is too worried he might lose some of his audience, I suggest he believes what he says, but only because he simply hasnt looked at the evidence.
Thanks, for your comment. Your response about Chomsky shows you care about the truth, unlike those M.O.D members manipulating the U.K truth movement on behalf of their paymasters who don’t care one iota about it.