First of all, let me apologise to everyone for probably the dumbest thing I've done for a long, long time, viz give an interview with the Standard - copied the next day to a whole load of other papers. I'll quite appreciate if anyone doesn't want anything more to do with me after that. I was astounded by the sheer, outright mendacity displayed by Rob Mendick on almost every point. I reproduce below a reply which I posted on Indymedia.
I keep waking up in the morning asking myself, how could I have done anything as dumb as that? Maybe just say, I'm credulous and trusting.
Second, I and Belinda brewed up the idea of a meeting on the 25th, for the nearest we could get to to the 3rd anniversary of July 7th. She invited me, and I said I would really like to discuss recent developments in the topic. Then next thing I knew an adjusted program had Nafeez billed as the only named speaker - on a quite general theme - and 'J7 researchers' also included, with a tacit understanding that I would be one of these. A fatal endeavour! Weren't nothing to do with me. Bridget has not stopped moaning since, how come I'm trying to pretend to be a 'J/7 researcher'? Well maybe its about time she came out and told us how her little clique of J7 is defined and how anyone gets to be a member? At no time did I propose or wish to share a platform with Nafeez. (He'd protest at me being a H-D, while I might object to his acceptance of Islamic guilt, both for 9/11 and for 7/7.)
I do agree about not having me on any 9/11 'truth' platform - sounds like Groucho Marx saying he wouldn't like to belong to any club that would have him as a member.
You guys had better hope that Nafeez turns up, after all this griping!
I hope there won't be any undue hate and rage if I just quietly turn up in the audience on 25th. So, no speaker will be holding forth about the tremendous developments in the July 7 story, from the Kingston trial, at any public meeting on the 3rd anniversary. Period. You lot want to have a 'the Muslims-did-it' speaker' - one whom Rachel and Milan Rai are quite happy to share a platform with.
..........................................................................................
Evening Standard Libel – no Right of Reply
Character-Assassination by Mendacious Mendick
Standard article, 10th June:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ ... article.do
Rob Mendick of the Evening Standard phoned me up and assured me that there were unpleasant things being said about me on the web and that he wanted to set the record straight. Was it true I was being paid by the BBC for working with them on the July 7 story? No way, I explained, I had paid my own expenses - except for one train fare out to Luton, eight pounds or so, which they had bought. So his article of 10th June starts ‘BBC paid expenses..’ followed by ‘The BBC has paid an undisclosed sum in expenses to Dr K…’ No, Mr Mendick, they did not pay my expenses to Leeds.
Had I pestered any victim families? Surely not, I explained, that was just a web-calumny launched against me by Rachel North, and reiterated by the Observer in its hit-piece of May 4th. I referred him to my thread about this, ‘Have I pestered victim-families?’
http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=14912
So his article began, ‘…who has pestered families bereaved by the 7/7 bombings, claiming the attacks were an intelligence agency plot’ – as if I had phoned them and told them some weird theory about the cause of death!
I’ve never come across such mendacity as that displayed by Rob Mendick. His article continued with the whopper, ‘He has admitted he phoned the father of one victim to tell him how he believed the man’s daughter’s body has been planted at the site of the Tavistock Square bus bombings.’ Again, see above thread for what really happened. I had explained to Mendick that I phoned the father, to ascertain the time of the last phone call he had received from his daughter before she was blown up in the 09.47 blast at Tavistock Square (if indeed she was) – after first asking his permission as to whether I might question him on this matter. The father confirmed what he had already said to an international newspaper on 11th July, viz that that last call had been at 09.45 that morning (of July 7 at King’s Cross). However, the purpose of this article was character-assassination. What monster would phone up someone they did not know, and claim to them their daughter’s body had been moved into the place where it was later discovered? The article repeated this untruth, beneath a picture of the exploded 30 bus.
He added that the victim’s family were upset by the thread I had posted, concerning this mystery death: should Mendick not have added what I clearly told him, viz that as soon as I received this complaint I deleted the thread? You can see it deleted here:
www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php ... riam+hyman
Somehow, I don’t reckon that such ethical issues are of great concern to Mr Mendick.
On a less terrible matter, Mendick fabricated the story that ‘Dr K took flowers to the parents of Aldgate bomber Shehzad Tanweer but they refused to see him.’ Mendick knows what actually happened, because I told him, but he decided that a lie made better copy. The title of this Standard article attributed to me the view that ‘7/7 was an MI5 plot…’ If the BBC go ahead with their program, you won’t hear me expressing that view.
It was inevitable that his article should call me a ‘Holocaust Denier’ – after all everyone else is so why shouldn’t he? Readers were treated to the following crackpot explanation: I have written an article entitled ‘The Auschwitz gas chamber Illusion’ (which is true, see
www.codoh.com/newrevoices/nrillusion.html) ‘claiming it was like a holiday camp where inmates sunned themselves by an “elegant” swimming pool and listened to orchestras.’ What utter nonsense! A reference please? But, Mendacious Mendick isn’t troubled by such things. Nothing remotely resembling any such statement is contained in the article alluded to. Remember, he phoned me up about three times in a quite friendly manner before printing this. The bottom line is, that web-calumny and gossip can now just spill over into newspaper print, via the poison pen of Mr Mendick.
As regards the defamatory claim that I’ve been posting on a ‘far-right’ website, the CODOH web-master assured me he would not allow the expression of far-right opinions. I checked after this allegation was first made (by Rachel North).
Mr Mendick cannot bear to mention that I have a PhD in the history of astronomy – that could be rather relevant to the 7/7 research, because as a science historian my training involves the accessing of primary-source data and not relying upon gossip and hearsay. No, instead he claimed I have a PhD in astronomy, which further makes me seem a mere figure of fun because it has zero relevance to the subject.
The front page of the Standard blared: ‘BBC pays man who insulted victims of 7/7’ – that is a fiction, I never did. I requested they print an apology but they would not.
The next day this story reappeared in the Mail, Sun, Telegraph and Express. Only The Express reporter troubled to turn up and check the story. I urge these newspapers not to trust a story coming from Mr Mendick. Character-assassination has been accomplished, which I guess was the aim of the exercise.
