this it's the funniest it's got since shaylor turned into jesus

Well, irrespective of whether he has been on any exploding buses or not, he has revealed himself to be a liar through a simple and common error. The MOD dept. called MI5 doesn't exist anymore. In fact, it became the Security Service back in the 50s or so and has been under the roof of the Home Office ever since.

It's funny someone else made the same mistake smearing some other activists recently.

Anyway, the man smelt of shit from the start, but the conspiraloons will cling to any old junk thrown their way.

I'm glad that there are people who want to challenge the Downing Street cover up and dig deeper; I'm disappointed that 99% of J7 Truth seems to be utter garbage leading people up a blind alley and away from very real "MI6" (SIS) crimes.

Oh well, perhaps I'll live long enough to see the declassified material which is broadly known in all but detail.

Meanwhile, as far as I am concerned 'We are change' can get back on Daniel Obachike's Magical Mystery bus.

Hi Johnny. Last night one of Daniel's audience, Mohsin, claimed that it was in fact you who cancelled the Conway Hall meeting on behalf of MI6. I have no idea what Daniel thinks of this as I will never speak to him again.

He has stolen compensation money from people who were really on the bus and were injured.

He has written a book full of shit and sold it top people who believed him.

He has wasted police and Security Services time.

He ripped off everyone last night.

Sue the m,an. Put him in a courtroom and do him for fraud.

There were people who had booked tickets online but were told that there was no way that Daniel could get the money [presumably becuase MI6 have infiltrated Ticketweb in an attempt to stop him] and they had to pay again.

Scamming, rip off, conning tosser.

I think that it is far more important to find out what did or didn't happen on 7/7 rather than worry that activists are gossiping or tittle tattling about each other. Usually it IS the guilty who make loads of noise about being accused when found out...about having "unfounded allegations / rumours spread" about them when people suss on...unfortunately the Home Office have contingency palns for when they are close to getting caught and a lot of smoke and mirror tactics to use.

People DIED on that bus. SOMEONE blew it up

Was it Daniel?

Was it the young Muslim man blamed?

Was it Mossad?

Was it British Security forces?

Who blew up the bus?

Yes Danile has revealed himself to be a liar...not because he isn't in on which correct terms to use for MI6 / MI5 / Home Office / MOD or becuase he has suspicions about activists ..[and there are many infililtrators in campaigns...often and usually from the industries that the campaigns attack than by the police or security services...the "other side" are often responsible for acts of sabotage against their own property / staff and blame it on activists] but simply as a con artist. What he has done is to completely discredit when there are genuine concerns about someone being a snitch / infiltrator by making his claims. He has also discredited his own story about the bus.

What happened on that bus is important ..not the grievances of gossiped about activists or "activists".

As for Daniel he IS a fraudster and should pay back his compensation money and let the genuine victims have it.

Think ahead: if his claims of having solid evidence were true he wouldn't be mistaking the spooks for squaddies. So, it pretty much indicates his "evidence" is lacking and more likely a load of tosh- if he can't get the very basics correct.

I don't think I'd be too quick to accept that Shayler & Machon are off the pay roll and not carrying on the MI6 agenda, or perhaps they were never important enough to worry about and now clinging to the nutty conspiraloons for survival.

Who carried out 7/7? Easy, the blokes who were named and who recorded video testimonies to that effect. There is no serious doubt about that and their motives.

Where the doubt starts to creep in is with the Downing Street proclamations of them "acting alone" and there being "no international dimension" or it "having nothing to do with Iraq". Which is 'odd' since they have been placed in the social circles of known MI6 assets in the UK and they named British war crimes against Muslims as their motivation. That again is hardly controversial, but rather well hushed up.

You go chasing Jews, sorry 'MOSSAD' and black helicopters all you want though, there nothing like a Sisyphean task to keep oafs tied up and out they way.

It seems someone else has taken my Indymedia id, and used it for themselves, more or less, adapting the name as "Bullshit Detector Van".

I don't share the views of "Bullshit Detector Van", and am a sceptic in regard to the official government conspiract theory about 7/7. Nothing to do with train times, lizards or aliens. Simply, my doubts about the official story focus upon the use of explosive (never revealed, yet a police conference in New York reported mobile detonators were used - though this was never reported over here), and the eye witness claims that the bombs were under the train.

I don't know about Daniel - never have. All I know is that his book was badly written by all accounts - surprised it got published.

Nick Kollerstrom is a deeply misinformed fellow regarding his rather madcap view of the holocaust - though there is some merit in questioning the numbers who perished there as Norman Finkelstein explored in his widely-acclaimed book "The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering was published in 2000."

And so the british wing of the truther movement implodes a little further. Hardly surprising given the people it manages to recruit. Holocaust deniers, the mentally unhinged, people with messia complexes, the pitiful Mr Gosling. Why don't you all devote your time to something less paranoid and a bit more enjoyable? Think of all the fun you could have going to Star Trek conventions?

I am surprised it has taken people so long to wake up to the fact that Obachike is a liar and a fraud. His 'story' has never added up and he has shown no qualms about altering it in the past when questioned about inconsistencies. His so called 'evidence' and 'proof' of what he claims has never been any more than him simply asserting that what he says is true - no substance and no evidence. He has only ever come across as a paranoid loon with a big ego. The comments page on his website is rigorously edited to only ever show gushing praise from the credulous.

I think genuine Tavistock bus passenger Richard Jones should sue for libel as should the many people whose pictures he posts up on his website claiming they are MI5 agents (again without a shred of evidence beyond his say so). And the poor bloke shown in bandages on the day of the bombings has had for years to suffer totally unsubstantiated claims that he was some sort of agent (again based on Daniel's 'intuition'). Now, when it seems he has totally lost the plot and started accusing all and sundry, people are finally beginning to wake up to his lies.

If all that were not annoying enough, this man has actually been taking money off people for years on the back of these unsubstantiated allegations. I think anyone foolish enough to by his poorly written self published excuse for a book, 'the fourth bomb' should demand a refund. And if it does turn out that he has claimed compensation for an event he was never involved in, he should be prosecuted for fraud.

It is not funny at all really, in fact it is quite sickening. This man has used a very public tragedy for his own personal gain and his continued lies should be challenged.

... which isn't very funny, but that is what makes the joke funny and you stagger back rubbing your eyes muttering sleepily "Woah! Paradoxical recursion in an unexpected mundane setting..."

I had no idea that anyone regularly used the name 'bullshit detector'. If I had I would have avoided it. But apart from that, no one owns a name on Indymedia- let alone one so common. If I were to try hijacking your identity it'd be as simple as just copying your screen name verbatim- I think I am just about skilled enough for that.

I chose the name because I though it was amusingly apposite. Since the smears reported were obvious bullshit, and a ridiculous cliché that usually indicated people have nothing to back up their claims- just like TV Detector Vans.

All analogies/metaphors/smilies have a point they fall down and this one falls down in the fact, that TV detection relies on the 99% chance of the 'Detector Man/Woman' knocking in any random door and being right, where as randomly accusing people as being agents is the opposite... which puts a sarcastic edge on the moniker.

But thanks for the cheap laugh at the serendipitous illustartion of how conspiraloons fail every scientific hurdle by being unable to factor 'random convergence' or 'coincidence' into an analysis- a bit like being in a perpetual state of egocentric (misguided) epiphany- er, that is, believing that everything is important and everything is all about you/your agenda.

Keep it up! You couldn't make this stuff up if you tried.

It seems someone else has taken my Indymedia id, and used it for themselves, more or less, adapting the name as "Bullshit Detector Van".

I don't know why he says he 'wouldn't steal the id of someone else so common'. Seems a bizarre comment to make considering we would have never met!

I don't share the views of "Bullshit Detector Van", and am a sceptic in regard to the official government conspiract theory about 7/7. Nothing to do with train times, lizards or aliens. Simply, my doubts about the official story focus upon the use of explosive (never revealed, yet a police conference in New York reported mobile detonators were used - though this was never reported over here), and the eye witness claims that the bombs were under the train.

I don't know about Daniel - never have. All I know is that his book was badly written by all accounts - surprised it got published.

Nick Kollerstrom is a deeply misinformed fellow regarding his rather madcap view of the holocaust - though there is some merit in questioning the numbers who perished there as Norman Finkelstein explored in his widely-acclaimed book "The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering was published in 2000."

7 rational questions about 7/7:

1). Why have none of the drivers of the 3 trains that were involved that day been interviewed, named or honoured. On the contrary, the driver of the Piccadilly Line train, Tom Nairn, was refused compensation on the grounds that the 'police had no record of him'.
Ref:  http://antagonise.blogspot.com/2006/01/london-77-information-event-horizon.html

2). Why did Scotland Yard deny that a second controlled explosion occurred on the Number 30 bus? (as reported by Miss Marie Oates-Whitehead, employee at the BMA and who was described as a herionne who assisted the injured after the explosion, and who died unexpectedly at her home 11 days later).

3). Why did the 100 million spent on Operation Theseus fail to establish the nature of the explosives used on 7 July 2005? Ref:  http://j7truth.blogspot.com/2009/05/nature-of-explosives-from-c4-to.html
Why were mobile detonators reported to have been found on the trains at a police conference in New York? Traces of military grade explosives (c4) were found at all 4 locations (source: UPI, 13/07/05), yet the bombs were reported to be homemade explosives, which would not cause the same amount of damage (testimony of French anti-terrorist expert Christophe Chaboud, brought in the advice Scotland Yard).

4). Why is there evidence that the bombs which detonated at Edgware Road and Aldgate East were underneath the train?
(several eye witnesses gave that account, including original report by the Guardian's Mark Honigsbaum who spoke to several eye witnesses to the Edgware Road tube bomb, and Bruce Lait, injured by the Aldgate East tube bomb, who was interviewed on the 11th July by a reporter from the Cambridge Evening Standard).

5). Why is there a mysterious lack of cctv footage from the no.30 bus which was bombed? What explanation is there for the fact that Stagecoach bus employees claimed that a different group of contractors inspected the CCTV cameras in the days before the bombings and that they took two entire days to carry out tasks which normally take just hours to complete? Ref:  http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/150705busbombing.htm

6). Why did Richard Jones, who was on the bombed No.30 bus and got off the bus shortly before it exploded, give a very misleading description of the bomber in his witness statement to the police and the media about the clothing and facial characteristics of the person he claimed had the backpack bomb on the bus - which didn't corroborate with clothing or facial likeness (colour of skin) of the alleged bomber Hasib Hussain.


7). How did Mossad have advance knowledge of the bombs? (according to BBC Conspiracy Files programme on 7/7, it was because at the Grosvenor Hotel in Mayfair, where Benjamin Netanyahu had been staying, as Nethanyahu left the hotel on his way to the conference in Liverpool Street, a policeman was outside the front entrance and informed him that there had been an explosion near Liverpool street station; however, 'Stratfor Intelligence Agency' reported that the Met Police gave Benjamin Netanyahu warning the bombs were going to happen 10 minutes before they happened. 2 weeks after, Mossad Chief Meir Dagan admitted he had informed Mr Netanyahu of the bombs ten minutes before they exploded at 08.40am on 7/7/2005. (source: Mossad chief Meir Dagan, in an interview with the German newspaper Bild am Sonntag on 10th July 2005).

I certainly wouldn't have wanted to pass myself off as someone so thick!

Point to a single thing I have said that would negate our opinions/beliefs on 7/7 being at odds or that I support the official version? I'll save you the time: up until now, there is nothing.

I am too suspicious about the reported explosive used- though I suspect for much different reasons. Though I think the idea that the bombs really were under the trains reveals anyone who thinks this without solid evidence (and picking knitting something out usual eyewitness variance doesn't qualify) to be raving nutcase. It presupposes that the named bombers didn't do it, which in turn opens up a whole plethora of nutty gymnastics.

How would a mobile phone work in the subterranean Underground anyway??? Mine never does. Are they special MI5/6/MOSSAD/CIA phones that defy physics?

And then we have the oh so telling, "though there is some merit in questioning the numbers"... the only merit beyond genuine research (of which there is no taboo) is the kind of bullshit research of NeoNazis like Ernst Zuendl who scumbags like David Irving, David Duke, KKK, and tiddlers like Koellerstrom ride on the backs of. And their agenda is pure and simple: racial attacks by all means necessary and the BOG-standard 'Jews rule the World' theories.

There is no merit in confusing scientific research with Jew baiting.

'Bullshit Detector Van' (or is that 'Bullshit Decorator Van', since he has a penchant for throwing around insults) said:
"Where the doubt starts to creep in is with the Downing Street proclamations of them "acting alone" and there being 'no international dimension' ".

> This is completely incorrect. 2 of the bombers went to Pakistan and are assumed to have recorded the videos there (you know, the videos in which their speech was not completely in synch with their lip movement! .. see: See:  http://cbcl.mit.edu/cbcl/news/files/assoc-press-article.pdf ).

I just said the government line was demonstrably untrue. But you have missed the more damning aspect, the one teh government has tried so hard to hush up. They are known associated of Finsbury Park mosque- an MI6/Mujahadin recruitment centre.

So you think that global community of forensic audiologists & video technology experts from Iran to Venezuela and from Russia to Algeria have all failed to spot a bit of montage & comping going on. Rather than the every day frame drift of a buggy compression codec? Sounds like more lizards and holograms to me... or the usual conspiraloon ostrich tactic of damning any evidence they don't like as being "fake!" without having arrived at that conclusion based on any evidence.

..BS Detector van, that there is a certain amusing irony in seeing people who may have been previously sympathetic to Obachike's 'story' (based as it is on some sort of 'inside job' meme) and who may have believed his evidence-free paranoid witch-hunt accusations when it was against people they did not know suddenly finding that it really is not such a pleasant experience when on the receiving end of baseless accusations. However, it is the whole grubby, profiteering side to it all which is so dispiriting and not so funny.

No doubt Obachike will lie low for a week, write some fictional account on his web site about what a 'mega' evening it was and how 'devastating' his hard evidence proved to be for all present (no doubt there will also be numerous people coming up to congratulate him on his 'insights' afterwards too), then he will go back to trying to flog his piece of shit book again to credulous fools or trying to charge gullible alternative media outlets £900 for 15 minute interviews so he can repeat his bollocks all over again and continue to count his cash.

People here really should make the effort to spread the word about this fraudulent tosser.

I was foolish enough to buy Daniel Obachike's book when I met him at a meeting once. He charged me a tenner but when I got it home I saw the price on the back was 8.99! I managed to only read the first chapter. It's the most badly written and farcical rubbish I've ever read.

Oh yes, I agree he really is a total scumbag. I feel more sorry for the passive victims (if he did indeed fake his claim to compensation) rather than the gullible fools that bought his book.

He's a shitty character and I'm sure reputation will spread now like wildfire, and he'll try to counter it by the tactic (doomed to failure) of trying to dig yourself out of lies with more lies.

The biggest irony for me is how no one in J7 Truth has any interest whatsoever in any of the real government criminality surrounding 7/7, in preference for outrageous tosh- whose agenda does that serve...

BDV said: "I'm disappointed that 99% of J7 Truth seems to be utter garbage leading people up a blind alley and away from very real "MI6" (SIS) crimes."

Why use J7 Truth and not 7/7 Truth? J7 is the term used for J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign.

J7 critically reviewed Daniel's book back in September 2007:

 http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j7-book-review-daniel-obachike-the-fourth-bomb.html

J7 wrote a rebuttal & rejection of 7/7 Ripple Effect when it was first released:

 http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j-for-justice-77-ripple-effect.html

J7 took a principled stand against the State Broadcasting Corporation when they approached us to appear in their risible and formulaic 7/7 Conspiracy Files episode

 http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/j7-refuse-bbc-conspiracy-files-offer.html

J7 suggested many of the areas of the Official Conspiracy Theory that this programme would neglect to examine

 http://j7truth.blogspot.com/2009/06/77-cf-final-draft.html

J7 are well aware of how many blind alley's exist, which is why we keep our bullshit detectors finely tuned.

......laugh out loud at this

Obachike claimed that 'Andy Baker is MOD "because he has a shifty face"'

Has Daniel rediscovered the nineteenth century pseudo-science of phrenology do you think, where it was believed that character traits and personality could be derived from skull shape?

There are plenty of photos on his website of people on the Tube and or in queues who are deemed to be 'MI5' simply, it seems, because he does not like the look of them, or, I suspect, because they have gone to some 'truther' event and asked a question which has made him look like the lying fraud that he is. There is never, ever, any proof offered to support his baseless accusations.

Mind you, none of this different than his previous claims about the events of 7/7, which are all based on such devastating, solid, cast iron evidence such as 'Daniel's intuition', or 'Daniel's gut-feeling'.

I am staggered anyone ever swallowed his shite.

My the egos are soaring today. I was using J7 Truth just like 9/11 Turth as a generic term. You flatter yourself in assuming that people associate the term with you- are you registered trademark holders? Having looked at your sorry collection of gibberish and piffle, I can only say that the cap indeed fits.

Why do MI6 have to even move a toe to muddy the waters when your collection of mad disnfo crap does it so well for them.

BDV claims he/she 'was using J7 Truth just like 9/11 Truth as a generic term' - on the contrary, 7/7 Truth would be the generic term unless you refer to 9/11 Truth as S11 Truth.

The rest of your comment just proves the point I made initially in response to you: "Bullshit Detector Van's attempt to smear J7".

J7 "mad disinfo crap", such as:

"The economics of 7/7 and other mysteries of capitalism explained", an article written for the July 7th Truth Campaign by writer and journalist William Bowles.

 http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-article-william-bowles-the-economics-of-77-and-other-mysteries-of-capitalism-explained.html

'July 7th as Machiavellian State Terror?' an article in which the events of 7/7 are given historical context and examined as potential acts of, 'Machiavellian state terror, spectacular violence perpetrated against the state by elements of the state itself' written for J7 by Professor David MacGregor.

 http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-article-david-macgregor-july-7th-as-machiavellian-state-terror.html

'Capitalising on Terror - Who is really destroying our freedoms?' - A look at how 7/7 has been used as the justification for the imposition of Draconian laws that criminalise everyone.

 http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/july-7-article-capitalising-on-terror.html

Nothing to do with ego, all to do with countering smears and misinformation.

So, you are now also claiming authorship of the habit of initialising the month before a date... like activists hadn't been doing that long before J7... it gets more and more bonkers.

I'd be worried if you didn't call my logic into question given what passes as logic on your site.

The day after the BBC's hatchet job on 7/7 truth the 4th bomb stil stands.
They had to fetch 'Peter Jones' the government lie-witness out of retirement to re-lie about being on the bus.

The link between We Are change UK member Simon and MI6 is confirmed.
Its all there at www.the4thbomb.com

Daniel Obachike

'The link between We Are change UK member Simon and MI6 is confirmed'

What stunning piece of evidence would that be then, does he have a funny walk?

I don't want to check your blog, you may end up making some money out of it.

 http://www.floranpublishing.co.uk/

Murders by police, the revelation of Jean, Agrippa's code, etc ?

What you have done is insult the Jihadis who were genuinely angry about crimes committed in the Middle East and against Islam.

You are laughing at everyone and care about no one but yourself.

You are not deserving of any respect and you are a sheister.

......his wallet, it is the only thing he really cares about after all.

Stop buying his libellous self published crap for one thing.

I wish he had been featured on the BBC programme the other day - though no doubt he ducked out in case they started looking a little too closely at his 'story'.

Daniel Obachike is a con man. he was never on the bus. He has never been invited to a survivor meeting. He will not be at the Memorial on 7th July. Other tavistock Rd survivors know he is a liar and a fraud. The has libelled injured survivors and called them agents, he has fraudulently taken money for a libellous book and the only reason nobody has commented publicly on this is a) because they don't want to give him publicity b) he is believed to be unbalanced and quite likely to harass people who speak out against him

Daniel, Simon is as much an intelligence asset as you are a reliable source of credible information regarding 7/7

...to expose this fraud - for years he has been lying through his teeth about his 'experiences' on 7/7 and continues to make money out of peddling his lying crap to people. Surely if other, genuine, 7/7 survivors know that he is a con-man then some sort of case could be brought against him.

Frankly, the fact that he has turned on other 'truthers' does not bother me - if there were not so many people in the so called 'truth' movement willing to accept without question and without a shred of real evidence his allegations about people and events on 7/7, then he would never have acquired his '7/7 truther celebrity' status in the first place. What is more, you may find that some people will believe his current accusations because the standard of what constitutes evidence or proof among some truthers continues to be so low that merely saying something, somehow makes it true. To an extent, you reap what you sow.

Obachike is clearly mentally ill, one glance at the extremely paranoid claims made on his website is evidence enough for that, but it is an outrage that he continues to get away with peddling his lies about 7/7 to people.

"Daniel Obachike, 34, from Finsbury Park, attended the King's Cross event to pay tribute to his best friend, Christian Njoya Diawara Small, who died in the blast.

He said: "It was a low-key ceremony and there are many of us who believe more could have been done in the aftermath."

He added: "I suppose it is of some consolation that figureheads have arrived to recognise us. I was with Christian the morning before he died - and obviously today feels particularly poignant.""
 http://www.itv.com/News/Articles/July-7-survivors-remembered-549893536.html

Daniel Obachike, 34, from Finsbury Park, north London, was there to remember his best friend, Christian Small, who died in the blast.

He said: "I was with Christian the morning before he died - and obviously today feels particularly poignant."
 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7481580.stm

Daniel Obachike, 34, who lost his best friend, Christian Njoya-Diawara Small, in the attacks, said: "It was a low-key ceremony and there are many of us who believe more could have been done in the aftermath.

"I suppose it is of some consolation that figureheads have arrived to recognise us. I was with Christian the morning before he died - and obviously today feels particularly poignant."
 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2261722/77-London-terrorist-bombings-Thousands-gather-to-mark-anniversary.html

Daniel Obachike, 34, from Finsbury Park, attended the King's Cross event to pay tribute to his best friend, Christian Njoya Diawara Small, who died in the blast.

He said: "It was a low-key ceremony and there are many of us who believe more could have been done in the aftermath.

"I suppose it is of some consolation that figureheads have arrived to recognise us. I was with Christian the morning before he died - and obviously today feels particularly poignant."
 http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/1389752/77-bomb-victims-remembered-July-7.html

Are there 2 Danial Obachikes?

If not, why would he not have mentioned the fact that he was himself a survivor of the bus blast?

Well firstly he can be reported for his fraudulent criminal compensation claim, if it is indeed so. I believe the CPS are those who administrate such matter:

 http://www.cps.gov.uk/london/contact/

But if you were to approach it as a fraud case it would be a matter for your local police.

He may very well be firing on less than all cylinders. In which case it'd needn't come to criminal proceedings in settling the compensation matter.

The establishment of his account of event being fictitious would also call the marketing if his book as fact into legal question- and also raises questions about the existing sales & profits.

His mental health is probably the most difficult point of all. Modern psychiatry and modern policing takes the view that no one is ill unless they consider themselves to be ill, or their behaviour is such that they need to be restrained by medical intervention and pose a risk of harm to themselves or others. It's a double edged sword. On one hand, gone are the days when people could be locked up for simply being gay, or for striking an abusive husband, or for masturbating... but conversely when someone is psychotic/delusional but not ticking all the Mental Health Act boxes, they are free to wreak all the misery they like on others... sadly, it's a very common scenario compounded by the fact the GPs have next to no psychiatric training. So, unless he starts barking at traffic on the Westway or assaulting people, there's nothing to be done.

There is also the other option that he is just/also a malicious liar.

It seems that the security services could well be hiring nutters as people who can be discarded under the "he/she is mad" banner when they have outlived their use...they can always make some cash from crazy books / talks though.....Shayler / Obachike.

Maybe in some kind of mad move the Intelligence [!] Services thought that they might catch any egotistical Jihadi bomber masterminds who want recognition / credit / glory for their actions.
Having Obachike come out publicly and saying "It was MI6" wot dunnit could have resulted in someon coming forward and saying "Oh No They Didn't". ....Was Obachike a MI6 bait?

Is this why he is now genuinely under surveillance, denounced as a nutter and believes that everyone around him / walking to work etc is MI6?

He is bonkers, that much is clear but stupid he isn't.

Was he / is he a doorman? Was he ever in the Marines? Was he working for MI6? Is he STILL working for them? Causing mistrust among activists? Or is he just a con artist?

Well, the funny thing is the blame for 7/7 lies at the feet of both Jihadi nutcases AND MI6. The Jihadis were brought by MI6 to the UK to recruit for the US/UK dirty war in the Balkans. It was inevitable when post-9/11 Afghanistan kicked off that the understanding between the UK & the Jihadis would be considered by the Jihadis as being null & void and an attack on the UK was on the cards.

Is Daniel MI6? I very much doubt he's even a useful idiot or patsy for them. MI6 seem to have absolutely nothing to fear from the J7 Truth and it's loony tunes conspiracy dross. If anything they are benefitting greatly from the smokescreen of bullshit- and who knows perhaps they are originating some of the nutty crap as a decoy; or perhaps they just don't even need to care- I suspect the latter.

The only thing they have to fear is someone in the (presumably small) loop breaking rank and facilitating criminal prosecution for State crimes of supporting, funding and carrying out acts of terrorism in the Balkans (and Afghanistan too), which would in tandem unearth the truth that 7/7 was the consequence of recruiting and backing Jihadi psychos to do America's bidding.

And I guess the general public would be pretty fucked off to discover that their government was so flippant with the lives of UK citizens by bringing these psychos into the country in the first place (assuming that as per usual no one but the liberal press would care about the victims in Eastern Europe or Central Asia).

So, my guess is he is a mix of Walter Mitty & con artist. I think Shayler makes a more obvious plant. But again, who knows. He could just be full of shit and pulling a con too.

At any rate, while J7 Truth remains a glorified Sci-fi convention (with a heavy emphasis on newspaper clippings and plot inconsistency geeks) it's not going to be a threat to anyone except serious researchers.

...to come down on the side of con-man/egocentric fantasist rather than government agent. There is no real evidence to suggest that Obachike has ever been under surveilance, other than his own word, which, frankly, is not worth anything. He is an egocentric fantasist, he even writes his own 'blurbs' for his book.

His most recent 'evidence', judging by his website, seems to take the form of him posting up video clips of WAC members and implying there is something 'fishy' about them - that's it, that is the sum of the 'proof' offered.

Yet, once again, there seem to be a couple of 'truthers', fawning on his website, for whom this 'evidence' seems to equate to case proven. Namely, 'WeAreAllShoes' hang your head in shame, whoever you are, you win the credulous idiot of the month award for July - I have some 'magic beans' for sale if you are interested!

Obachike is an arrogant, lying fraud who makes a 'living' out of libelling other genuine victims and survivors of 7/7. I hope he ends up banged up and penniliess.

at the London Anarchist Bookfair in 2008. Like a fool, I thought he must be genuine. I bought his book. The most nonsensical piece of rubbish that I have ever read. It did not hang together and made no sense whatsoever. I tried to contact DO to ask him at what point he actually presented himself to the Police as a witness - the book is silent on this as it is in many other respects, but I could find no way of contacting him other than by setting up a MySpace account that I will not do. Sadly, I saw his book in Housemans Bookshop in Kings Cross a couple of months later - I suggested that the staff should pull it as they would not consciously want to deceive decent people in the shop.

The guy is either mentally unstable or he is on some sort of bizarre, self funded, power trip.

Why don't you donate your significant earnings from your book to real victims?

As for the great repyl from Bullshit Detector Van to Nut Nut...well said.

On his website Daniel has said about Annie Mahon : "Leave Annie Mahon out of this. You can't go around branding people unless you have proof. I have hard evidence against Andy B and his excitable MOD colleagues".

Daniel.... "Having a shifty face" is not hard evidence that someone is MI6 / MOD.

OK, I'll bite...

“1). Why have none of the drivers of the 3 trains that were involved that day been interviewed, named or honoured.”
As Kings Cross survivors have reported, Tom N never wanted to be named. Given the trauma they’ve been through, I can understand the drivers not wanting to talk to the press (or, these days, the tinfoil hat brigade). Those TFL staff who came to the rescue of their own accord, and have wanted to talk to the press, have been honoured.

“2). Why did Scotland Yard deny that a second controlled explosion occurred on the Number 30 bus? (as reported by Miss Marie Oates-Whitehead, employee at the BMA and who was described as a herionne)”
Um - that would be the Miss Marie Oates-Whitehead who was exposed as a fantasist who had fabricated her medical qualifications. So about as reliable a witness as Daniel O.

“3). Why did the 100 million spent on Operation Theseus fail to establish the nature of the explosives used on 7 July 2005?”
Maybe it’s really difficult to do. It’s not as if all the resources were expended on that aspect of the investigation.

“4). Why is there evidence that the bombs which detonated at Edgware Road and Aldgate East were underneath the train?”
This has been debunked by… Mark Honigsbaum, who you cite! (Why do all the conspiraloons fail to acknowledge that?)
As he wrote: “It later became clear from interviewing other passengers who had been closer to the seat of the explosion that the bomb had actually detonated inside the train, not under it, but my comments, disseminated over the internet where they could be replayed ad nauseam, were already taking on a life of their own.”
 http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/jun/27/july7.uksecurity

“5). Why is there a mysterious lack of cctv footage from the no.30 bus which was bombed?”
Maybe because it was bombed? Interesting that you’ve stopped claiming there was no CCTV footage of it or the tube stations, given that’s been shown to be untrue by the footage shown at the recent trials (including that of the bus shot from the BMA).

“6). Why did Richard Jones, who was on the bombed No.30 bus and got off the bus shortly before it exploded, give a very misleading description of the bomber”
Because people’s memories of traumatic events are often rubbish. Remember that members of the public on the tube claimed they saw wires protruding from Jean Charles de Menezes jacket. That wasn’t accurate, either.

“7). How did Mossad have advance knowledge of the bombs?”
If you believe their boast – and it may just be a boast - maybe it’s because they spend a vast amount of time and effort… keeping track of Islamic terrorist groups? Their chief, whose quotes have since been denied by the Israeli government, also only said they’d known six minutes ahead, too late to do anything. They had warned before that had been that an attack might happen – but there had been lots of warning about potential tube attacks. The Evening Standard had run stories about the possibility before (citing, if my memory serves me correctly, Kings Cross, Oxford Circus and Bank/Monument as likely targets). Crucially, if Mossad were in on it, and are part of a conspiracy, why would their chief admit prior knowledge of the attacks to a German newspaper? That wouldn’t make any sense – but then none of your suppositions do.

....from here:

 http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=17469&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=90

That Obachike (Chi of Life) is claiming that because the meeting was disrupted he could not present the full force of his 'evidence' which would have been in the form of a Powerpoint presentation.

This begs the question, if hard evidence and clear proof existed, would not that proof exist in Obachike's head anyway even if he did not have his presentation handy - surely the argument would need to be more cogent than simply basing accusations on whether or not someone had a shifty face or was bossy?

Moreover, if there was some proper form of documentary proof, why bother to photocopy people's facebook profile pictures, why not instead bring along photocopies of the substantive evidence itself. Maybe his 'evidence' took the form of video clips as per his website - where Obachike says 'see, that sounds odd to me - clearly MI5' and a handful of gullible idiots nod knowingly and approvingly, while the rest of the world looks on thinking - what the fuck sort of 'proof' is that supposed to be? Obachike consistently fails to draw a distinction between convincing himself of something and 'objective proof'. He does not seem to grasp that the two things are in fact poles apart.

In short, this is just more bollocks - with or without a powerpoint presentation, if the substance of the argument was at the level of shifty faces and the like then there really is not much more to be said.

This man is not an activist in any sense of the word - he simply turns up to all manner of activist events to sell his book to sympathetic, if somewhat gullible, fools. Maybe sales have been on the wane recently or maybe his tastes have gotten more expensive, so perhaps he thought he would branch out from his baseless accusations and made up stories about his role in 7/7 and start pushing his paranoid worldview further afield. It seems to have backfired.

Hopefully now people will give him the cold shoulder and wide berth he so richly deserves.

Orville N (also known as Norville B, Norvello) replied to my 7 questions about 7/7.

My response to some of the answers he gave (my original questions in quotes first):


“1). Why have none of the drivers of the 3 trains that were involved that day been interviewed, named or honoured.”
Your ANSWER: "As Kings Cross survivors have reported, Tom N never wanted to be named."
> MY RESPONSE: Can you quote where they said this?
Your ANSWER: "Given the trauma they’ve been through, I can understand the drivers not wanting to talk to the press (or, these days, the tinfoil hat brigade). Those TFL staff who came to the rescue of their own accord, and have wanted to talk to the press, have been honoured."
> MY RESPONSE: I wasn't talking about the press, I was talking about the police, as well you know.

“2). Why did Scotland Yard deny that a second controlled explosion occurred on the Number 30 bus? (as reported by Miss Marie Oates-Whitehead, employee at the BMA and who was described as a herionne)”
Your ANSWER: "Um - that would be the Miss Marie Oates-Whitehead who was exposed as a fantasist who had fabricated her medical qualifications. So about as reliable a witness as Daniel O."
> MY RESPONSE: Just where was see exposed as a fantasist? Not by one of the compromised tabloid newspapers by any chance? Surely not a reliable source of one's character assessment, judging by countless examples over the years. It is also too easy for you to say this to obfuscate with assertions you are not backing up with any evidence.


“3). Why did the 100 million spent on Operation Theseus fail to establish the nature of the explosives used on 7 July 2005?”
Your ANSWER: "Maybe it’s really difficult to do. It’s not as if all the resources were expended on that aspect of the investigation."
> MY RESPONSE: Not a justification for not establishing the one of the most fundamental elements of the 7/7 bombings which required an answer to. Suspicious that after initial press briefing of homemade explosives having been used (and even press reports of homemade explosives found in the home of Khan), a French explosive expert claimed that there was military explosive found at the 4 sites on 7/7 (why would he say such a thing if there was not evidential proof that the explosions hadn't been caused by military explosive?) Suspicious that absolutely no mention iwas subsequently made in the narrative, by the government or intelligence services about this after this guy spoke out.

It is clear you are wilfully part of some kind of attempt to distract attention from the facts of the case if you can't observe there is something dodgy here.

“4). Why is there evidence that the bombs which detonated at Edgware Road and Aldgate East were underneath the train?”
Your ANSWER: "This has been debunked by… Mark Honigsbaum, who you cite!"
> MY RESPONSE: "yes, but not by Bruce Lait who said the same thing about the train that exploded at Aldgate East and who was interviewed in the BBC Conspiracy Files documentary.
I'm sure if there was a public enquiry, such evidence could be clearly analysed in the open, without any 2nd hand intepretations.

Bruce Lait, injured by the Aldgate East tube bomb was interviewed on the 11th July by a reporter from the Cambridge Evening Standard. Mr Lait explained that as he was being led to safety, "The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag".

“5). Why is there a mysterious lack of cctv footage from the no.30 bus which was bombed?”
Your ANSWER: "Maybe because it was bombed? Interesting that you’ve stopped claiming there was no CCTV footage of it or the tube stations, given that’s been shown to be untrue by the footage shown at the recent trials (including that of the bus shot from the BMA)."
> MY RESPONSE: Perhaps, but you give no answer to why Stagecoach bus employees claimed that a different group of contractors inspected the CCTV cameras in the days before the bombings and that they took two entire days to carry out tasks which normally take just hours to complete. Perhaps because there is no answer to this. Another unanswered susicpicion about 7/7 which begs a full, independent Public Enquiry intio what happened.

“6). Why did Richard Jones, who was on the bombed No.30 bus and got off the bus shortly before it exploded, give a very misleading description of the bomber”
Your ANSWER: "Because people’s memories of traumatic events are often rubbish. Remember that members of the public on the tube claimed they saw wires protruding from Jean Charles de Menezes jacket. That wasn’t accurate, either."
> MY RESPONSE: Possibly true

“7). How did Mossad have advance knowledge of the bombs?”
Your ANSWER: "If you believe their boast – and it may just be a boast - maybe it’s because they spend a vast amount of time and effort… keeping track of Islamic terrorist groups? Their chief, whose quotes have since been denied by the Israeli government, also only said they’d known six minutes ahead, too late to do anything. They had warned before that had been that an attack might happen – but there had been lots of warning about potential tube attacks. The Evening Standard had run stories about the possibility before (citing, if my memory serves me correctly, Kings Cross, Oxford Circus and Bank/Monument as likely targets). Crucially, if Mossad were in on it, and are part of a conspiracy, why would their chief admit prior knowledge of the attacks to a German newspaper? That wouldn’t make any sense – but then none of your suppositions do."
> MY RESPONSE: I'm not here to rationalise WHY the head of Mossad gave an interview to a german newspaper and made these remarks (Mossad Chief Meir Dagan admitted he had informed Mr Netanyahu of the bombs ten minutes before they exploded at 08.40am on 7/7/2005, in an interview with the German newspaper Bild am Sonntag on 10th July 2005). The question as to why Mossad had advance knowledge is a justified question to ask.

....if you were a genuine Tavistock Square bus passenger Daniel, why call yourself Obachike instead of Adigwe?

 http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=17469&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=90

 http://whois.domaintools.com/terroronthetube.com

Is it because if you did call yourself Daniel Adigwe, people who know you as such could possibly come forward to clarify that you were not anywhere near the Number 30 bus or indeed Tavistock Square on 7/7?