Tony Farrell Report: The "Charles Seven" story. Entrapment or Insanity?
A warning to researchers in alternative media
(SCROLL DOWN FOR ORIGINAL ARTICLE.)
This thread has become very long but contains some fascinating insights.
For anyone who knows nothing of this story:
Myself, Mark Windows and Mad Scotsman of landofthefree were approached by Tony Farrell, who purports to be an ex police statistician and "Intelligence analyst", to cover a story by a woman who alleges the 7/7 bombings were done to "shut her up". The "reason" she alleged was that she had some scripts for TV show ideas stolen by lawyers.
The story was so ludicrous that we thought it was insane, or some kind of entrapment as this woman was making libellous allegations about lawyers, one of whom specialised in internet libel. The UK Column broadcast an interview with Farrell and this woman, who called herself "Charles Seven".
(I had warned UK Column about the chances of them getting sued, as the woman had libelled a lawyer who specialised in internet libel ..on their internet show, it couldnt get more obvious).
Brian Gerrish of The UK Column told Farrell what we had told UK Column in confidence, about the possible repercussions and the story being without substance. For UK Column to do this was in journalistic terms a betrayal of trust and in real terms, deeply suspicious.
As we had been specifically chosen to film this story and after hearing it had declined to get involved, Farrell, then Belinda McKenzie (who involved herself in The Hollie Greig case) and also the woman who invented the story turned against us and started libelling myself, Mark Windows and fellow researcher Mad Scotsman. This was done through Tony Farrell and his "Farrell Report" (which contained not one fact). There was also a broadcast on an internet radio show, although, no one believed the fake story after the broadcast. (The link is below) There are also e mails below (scroll down) where attempts were made to divide and rule us against each other.
The following thread is the whole story and correspondence. It exposes a group of people who are pushing not only fake stories but also working to discredit and entrap researchers in alternative media. They are also wasting the time of people like ourselves who have real corruption to expose. The tactics they used against us however reveal more sinister motives.
There are armies of ex police and private security monitoring and also co opting researchers into either entrapment or surveillance. Be wary! There are paid disinformation agents and disruptors who are working to enforce more draconian laws and the implementation of Agenda 21 aka The Big Society. A communofascist agenda being implemented at all levels.
The woman promoting the fake story also called Mark Windows and Mad Scotsman "government agents" who infiltrate groups. "Reversal", is a tactic used to discredit researchers and activists and can be seen in abundance in this article. Quite simply, they accuse you of what they themselves are doing.
As we are known and respected for our work in exposing government infiltration and corruption the smear tactics did not work. This thread is important information to anyone exposing state and corporate corruption and will give insight into what tactics are used so they can be deflected before more serious damage is done.
Update: Tony Farrell Exposed: According to this companies check Tony Farrell was working for the police until earlier this year. This makes his story entirely bogus.
Secretary, INTELLIGENCE ANALYST IN POLICE, 1999.04.13 - 2013.05.03
49 WOODLAND DRIVE , WATFORD
Belinda McKenzie exposed
We were not going to publish this e mail which Belinda McKenzie sent to a now ex member of The Keep Talking Group, (he was barred for being abusive and attacking members on the forum), however Belinda Mckenzie will not let up on personnal attacks on Mark Windows.
One member of the group also made the observation that we were being labelled "rascist" for not believing The Charles Seven story, then Ms McKenzie states Mr Windows had "The Hots" for Ms "Seven". Lies breed lies and the whole of this scenario reveals those who have attempted to discredit us. Here is her e mail in response to Belinda McKenzies inflammatory and libelous e mail which Tony Farrel put in the public domain in his "Rebuttal"
CASE STUDY 6
ALLEN JASSON & BELINDA MCKENZIE
From Belinda to Allen Jasson:
Allen you’ve done a great service, thank you!
MW is at best completely up his own arse, at worst a paid infiltrator, possibly a
combination of both by now, but more than these, he’s clearly an agent of the inter-
dimensional dark forces as are many comedians whose job on earth is to demolish
anything we humans begin to take seriously, in this case the bare-faced criminality and
corruption of those in high places (with which they get away, time after time because so
far virtually no one is challenging them!). Like all comedians many of whom are bi-polar
(I know for a fact Mark has terrible ‘lows’) Mark operates at very high revs mentally and
no doubt also physically. He requires the oxygen of continuous applause, he cannot
tolerate criticism or being challenged. We also suspect he had the hots for Seven who is
very beautiful but also very moral and would never dream of succumbing to the
advances of such a low form of life, which he’s sharp enough to realise but nevertheless
it still makes him all the more angry. He’s a mind-control junkie, he wants to dominate
the minds of the 9/11KT group and is achieving some success in that, q.e.d. I very
much hope they’ll come out of it but no sign yet. He’s already taken over Dony’s mind to
a frightening degree, he’s in Dony’s dreams, poor, ill Dony is completely entrapped! This
is no doubt what is spurring Mark on to think he can get others within the truth
community totally under his power, he’s now a man on a mission! Of course MW loathes
Farrell who is brave enough to take on demons. That’s what this is really about as I see
it – spiritual war in the classic sense. Thank you again for your time in formulating this
beautifully-written riposte. MW will of course brush it aside and already has but
hopefully it will help others in the group to come to their senses.
Very best wishes
Well she has exposed herself here, the lies and libellous statements in the above rant reveal her true nature.
The referral to "terrible lows" was twisted by Ms McKenzie as I stated I got "burned out" sometimes. The referral to being in Donys dreams refers to a "healer" she suggested Dony visit who stated "helpers" would visit you in a dream state four days later. The "helpers" were a hooded figure who suffocated the dreamer in a confined space. Strange but true!
A response from Nica of The Keep talking group
Sorry to stick my oar in here, i know i am new to this group but I'm confused, is Mark a racist because he does not believe Seven's story, or did he turn against her because he had the hots for Seven? If he is such a racist why would he have 'the hots' for Seven? Well you guys have shot yourselves in the foot with your varied accusations haven't you, since Mark, by logic, cannot be both a racist and be attracted to a woman of color like Seven. You cannot have it both ways and it seems to me that Belinda, Seven and Tony will say anything in order to try and discredit Mark, and as a person who has suffered as a child from genuine racism, i find it appalling and offensive that the race card has been used to try and silence a man who is utterly non racist, (the same goes for totally untrue accusations leveled at Dony). These false accusations on the characters of two of the truth movements most hardworking and genuine people are not only libelous, they are highly insulting to those who really do experience genuine racism.
own goal much!
Surely Belinda this was the time to point out to Seven your belief that Mark 'had the hots' for her and so was unlikely to be a white hood wearing racist. Anyone with any integrity would have.
t's very sad Belinda, you used to be respected and admired by truth seekers, now you are exposed as a manipulator, and a liar, (here for clarity Belinda i am referring to your lie about yourself and Tony sneaking into a meeting and Ian not recognizing Tony, which you hastily backtracked from and issued an attempted face saving apology, once your lie had been exposed.) Believe me Belinda, very few people believe a word you say these days.
Belinda McKenzie manipulating once more in response to Mad Scotsman and Nica
Well whatever Tony and Seven have written or said is their business but like Nica’s comment your comment here clearly relates to me since you refer to me as “ringleader”.
So please show me ONE INSTANCE where I Belinda have made a racist remark or used the issue of race to bolster an argument? to validate your point.
If you can’t then YOU are lying/inventing stuff.
As a general point, if you accuse someone of being a liar (ie. a person who habitually lies) in a public/group discussion presumably with intent to persuade 3rd parties then you have to show EXAMPLES PLURAL where the person in question has manifestly and provably lied.
Otherwise all this is just so much rather malodorous hot air and will impress no one serious-minded. I’m bound to say it also discredits the research you claim to have done on Seven’s case in an attempt to prove that fraudulent, if these are your standards.
I note that Mark has yet to answer my last email re. loyalty and being in with “the right people”, whoever those are.
Response from Nica
At no point did i say the accusations of racism were made in this thread or this forum, i am talking generally, as well you know Belinda. This is another example of you twisting facts Belinda, you are an adept manipulator. It was in fact in a communication to yourself that Seven made her allegations of racism against Mark and Dony. I was posting, because having followed the Seven debacle on Land of the Free, i now see a communication where you accused Mark of turning against Seven because she rejected his advances. I don't understand how you could go along with a man being slandered as a racist when you have accused that same man of having the hots for a black woman.
Here is Seven's very libelous communication to you, note the amount of times race and racism are referred to, also the number of times the words nasty and evil are used. (Scroll down for Sevens libellous ranting e mail)
There were more e mails picking out Belindas lies but this thread could become as long as one of Tony Farrells reports!
The good news it has worked in the favour of those who are getting truth out as it has polarised the situation. This libellous rant was posted on the Farrell Report "Rebuttal". After Ms McKenzie was exposed for her lies Farrell stated he would take it down.
Although this e mail is a rant it exposes the character of the author.
Belinda McKenzie appears to do very little research on any of the causes she backs. This was apparent with the Hollie Greig case. It was also obvious when she backed the Charles Seven and Tony Farrell nonsense, which wasted the time of researchers and more than one group. It appears that she runs away with a cause and will not let anything get in the way of her ego and status within that cause. She is at best a loose cannon and at worse has been damaging to groups and individuals who may have a more informed or contrary view to her own. She does display all the traits of a sociopath, however her lies have backfired on her and we have exposed some ot this below. There are more e mails which we will post as the duplicitous nature and manipulation of this woman knows no bounds.
We do not say this lightly and this is not a rant or personnal attack. She will do anything to discredit anyone who questions her, this resulted in the group which we were part of vowing never to visit her house again after her deeply personnal attacks were responded to by other members of the group. She will never give up even when the lies and manipulation have been exposed. Her goal is social status at all costs, the truth is not on her agenda, only her being the champion of the cause.
Having been attacked by Ms McKenzie and seen first hand the duplicitous tactics and lies she spreads I have to conclude that she is an extremely dubious and dangerous person to be around where credibility is important and genuine research is the goal.The following e mail gives the usual reversal and lies as she is desperate to recruit Mr Jassen to her cause. He was also outed as a thoroughly nasty piece of work and barrred from the Keep Talking group.
All Previous Posts
Tony "No Facts" Farrell gets personnal and makes more ridiculous claims. His rants are now libellous, although also hilarious. He has now come up with a "Rebuttal" which does not rebutt anything, however it does waste time, which is what he has done from when he first appeared in 2010. The ridiculous "quotes" Farrell uses have often been doctored as anyone who has read our original posts will be aware of. It is a mixture of pointlesness and maniplulaion which indicates desperation.
A big part of his manipulation is to try and make it personnal, if people dont believe his fantasy. This tactic has been used continuously. He has also used reversal techniques at all times (everything that actually happened he states the opposite on public forums to discredit the facts). This is very telling and indicates his training , which is pretty poor but very manipulative.
Both Farrell and the woman calling herself "Charles Seven" have also issued threats and made statements which they could now be prosecuted for. Belinda Mckenzie, the "rent a cause" and questionable "activist" has also joined in once again with personnal attacks on both Mark Windows and Mad Scotsman.
We now see this as a compliment as our work has been successful and hopefully influential, it speaks for itself. (Which is why we have been targeted)
As Tony Farrell received at least £6,000 in donations through Richplanet.net, isnt it time to ask for this to be returned to the donators ? He has provably betrayed the truth movement and attacked real truth seekers for refusing to believe the fake "Charles Seven" story, as well as using real experts in the truth movement to publicise himself and his now provably nefarious motives.
See the latest on the Farrellreport.net. The Seven character has also stooped lower than low by alleging some kind of racial element and issued threats of her own. She also lies in an "affadavit". The lies are blatant but Farrell has also quoted what we actually said, which is the best of what he published. The Farrell report and "Rebuttal" are worth a read for pure comedy value, though they are incredibly long and tedious too.
This affair proves that if people who are genuine stick together these attacks can backfire on the perps.
(If it wasnt for the fish jokes, it wouldnt be funny. Mr Tony Mackerel of South Tuna Police has exposed himself as a laughing stock.)
I felt a need to reply on behalf of landofthefree to a post Mr Farrell put up on the terroronthetube website, once again accusing us of some kind of vulgarity towards the Seven character. Dr Nick Kollerstrom who was used by Farrell to gain credibility by being filmed with him also calls out Farrell for his lies about Mark Windows and Mad Scotsman. Here is the whole thread...
"For the record Mr Farrell there have been no vulgar comments from me or anybody else I know regarding the Seven Character. The lies that woman has put out are now as nasty as they are ridiculous. The joke is on you Im afraid. Your ridiculous "debunking" shows you for exactly what you are. The vile accusations of the Seven character would get her sued if anyone actually knew her name.
This story gives the inside information on Tony Farrell, the Charles Seven fantasy which he promoted and the network he aligned himself with. Scroll down for new info but read all the thread if you want to know how this operation was set up and also The UK Column involvement, which should be of concern to all genuine researchers and truth seekers.
On Tony Farrells "Rebuttal" which can be seen on his site.
As usual , everything Mr Farrell states is the opposite of the reality. This is why he and Charles Seven make such a sinister double act.
The Farrell report, the fact is there are no facts. Fact. The rebuttal of our facts was not a rebuttal. A rebuttal must have a counter argument which can be stated as fact, as usual Mr Farrells do not. The fact is though Mr Farrell could never have been an “intelligence analyst” as he cannot analyse anything. Fact. If he ever did work as a number cruncher or statistician (or one who manufactures figures to suite the policy and political fakery of corporations like the police) his sacking was surely justified. Mr Farrells only ally now seems to be the character calling himself “Muad Dib” or Teacher of righteousness who has two followers, or three including Mr Farrell. This teacher of righteousness sent an e mail to a great researcher and friend of ours who had just undergone a heart by pass surgery hours before stating that “Father” had punished him for not believing The Tony Farrell and Charles Seven Fantasy. These people are sick, the personal attacks, lies and manipulation of Farrell and the Seven character along with this deluded fantasist reveal the dark mental illness which bonds them together, or it is the worse entrapment excercise done by undercover cops we have ever witnessed.
Whole thread starts here....
Here is the thread from The Kent Freedom Movement.
Who does Tony Farrell think he is? Maybe we will soon find out. We still havent heard back about a live debate yet. (for full paragraph scroll to bottom of page)
The attacks get more personnal and vitriolic, everbody who questions this story is now a "disinfo agent". His mantras are repetitive, he sticks to his cliches and is lost without them. The use of reversal and manipulation is much in evidence in the e mail exchanges reproduced below.
The "Seven" character also launches a psychotic attack (below) which may of course be a ploy. There is much more to this story than at first meets the eye.
17 April: Latest rant from Tony Farrell. This was against The Kent Freedom Movement. He is now making rascist slurs against those who have debunked the "Seven" fantasy. As there is no evidence to support his case this is pure desperation.
Tony Farrell: "YOU ALLOW THIS UTTERLY PUTRID AND SHAMEFUL BLOGGING TO GO UNCHECKED! HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF BAYES PROBABILITY THEOREM? GIVEN THE STALKING, IT'S NOT QUITE SO TENUOUS AS YOU MIGHT IMAGINE, BUT YOU'VE MADE YOUR OWN POSITION ABUNDANTLY CLEAR. FOR KFM READ KKK."
The link below is to the latest You Tube "interview" posted by Mr Farrell on his Farrell Report page. (its now been removed but is available on You Tube) It is the "Seven" character rambling in the usual way with another attack on myself Mark Windows. I get mentioned here eight time as a "government agent". (When do I get paid then!) Fellow researcher Mad Scotsman only gets mentioned a few times by her (he is quite rightly furious!) and they get his name wrong!
This says more about the people who believe and entertain this than it does about her or Mr. Farrell. As this fantasy was promoted and could easily be used to discredit alternative media it proves how gullible and unable to do basic research those at "open your mind" radio are. As we stated Keyboard Warriors and fools do rush in...They let The "Seven" character ramble on without questioning or checking anything she said.
Open Your Mind Radio (OYM) Seven 4 Justice - 14th April 2013. They did disable comments but now they are there again. Have Open Your Mind radio opened their minds to this fantasy and how ridiculous they look for supporting it ?
Scroll down for more of the recent posts
Activists in the UK are regularly monitored. Groups of individuals exposing tyranny and corruption are regularly infiltrated. Activists and researchers are quite rightly suspicious about newcomers to groups who promote agendas straight away or appear to be causing rifts in the group. This is of course classic technique to split up groups who may have some effect.
The Occupy St. Pauls and Bank of ideas “squat” were brilliant examples of infiltration. The original Occupy St. Pauls was taken apart with only a few agents, then government and UN policy of Climate change and Agenda 21 introduced by these new “facilitators”. Some of the same people were behind “Democracy Village”, which resulted in Brain Haw and Barbara Tucker being pushed out of Parliament square. Interestingly the funds raised for Occupy St. Pauls were filtered into “Climate Camp” bank accounts never to be seen again. The Bank of Ideas "squat" was set up to change the law on squatting in public buildings.
To see how Occupy was taken over check out our films on the landofthefreeuk You Tube channel.
The puppet Masters of Occupy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxslgRjVzZs
Inside Occupy and the Bank of Ideas http://www.youtube.com/watch v=7jhRwBzXgGM
The Puppet Masters of Occupy
updated and revisited 2013 http://www.youtube.com/watch v=Qb_AsNPbyeM
To the experienced these people are easy to spot as they are not particularly well versed in the subjects they pretend to know about. They often resort to sound bites and slogans and have no depth of knowledge.
The dangers come more from those who promote their own cause to groups and get support from some members and/or divide and rule the rest.
Then there are those who sincerely believe in their own fantasies.
A recent example which is so fantastical it could not be believed unless it was psychosis or plain entrapment (and can be proved to be untrue with a five minute internet search) is that of a woman who calls herself “Charles Seven”, this is of course not her real name and she will not state what her real name is.
“Charles Seven” appeared at the IPCC demonstration on Mayday 2012
In the above video she is seen shouting through a megaphone “My name is Charles Seven”, and that she knew the “real story” behind the 7/7 bombings. She maintains that Jean Charles De Menezes was killed because he had a similar name, even though there is no legitimate proof she has Jean Charles in her name. She goes on to name lawyers who stole her ideas and states she won her court case, which was untrue.
She also hijacked the mike for a long time and took away the focus of what the demonstration was about. Whether you believe her or not this is classic infiltration. The delusional, psychotic and quite shizophrenic nature of the story make one wonder why anyone would promote it.
This public appearance was from a woman who alleges she has been "gang stalked", had death threats and her flat broken into since 2006. She claims she was smuggled to a police station in fear of her life. She also claims to have been too scared to leave her own flat yet seemed quite happy to be the centre of attention at the demonstration.
The initial part of her story revolves around a claim of intellectual copyright theft (which is extremely difficult to prove unless every single aspect is nailed down.) She claims to have invented a “platform” of fitness entertainment programs and had her ideas stolen by high profile lawyers and with the complicity of large media organizations although there is no evidence of this. The examples she gives are untrue.
She states she has worked in media all her life and been involved in television, choreography, music and filmmaking, yet she gives not one example of anything which can be verified. There is not one picture of her on the internet in any past project. If you have worked in media you will quite obviously be known by a lot of people. She did have a company called “I am 7 media”, which has been dissolved.
She uses a similar name to a woman who has been involved in all the things she states she has done.
She claims that her copyright issues lead to her being threatened and “gang stalked’. She also maintains a band was named Charlie 7 to scare her, the reference she gives is an internet page for the band and on the same page was an advert stating “Chasing Victory, a not so tragic cover up”. She maintains this was a reference to her. This titel was actually an advert for another band not even related to Charlie 7. There is absolutely no tangible connection between her, the band or the advert.
“Charles Seven” also claims she successfully sued ten defendants, the story can be proved to be false at this point as the case is easily searched on the internet.
Here is her “story” which is cut and pasted on many blog sites.
The implications of this are obvious.
The quote “Media, mafia, ritualistic, satanic, witch hunt, vendetta, to psychologically torture, terrify and paralyse me” is like a word association list to hook over eager keyboard warriors who cannot properly digest information, but love a good sound bite.
Anyone giving her story credence in any media outlet is setting them selves up (or being set up) for massive libel claims for the seriousness of the allegations. All the people she accuses are top lawyers including one who specializes in internet liable.
It looks like such an obvious set up yet The UK Column actually endorsed the story and aired an interview with her and supporter ex “Principal intelligence analyst” for South Yorkshire police Tony Farrell.
Tony Farrell appeared in 2010 at a group meeting in London of researchers. He claimed to have found out through internet searches that both 7/7/ and 9/11 were an “inside job”.
Mr. Farrell states his “conscience as a Christian” made him confront his superiors and state he could not produce the statistical terror risk assessment they wanted from the information supplied to him , as was his job as a statistician. He was represented by well known QC Michael Shrimpton at his employment tribunal appeal. Since more about Tony Farrell has come out people at his tribunal have questioned the authenticity of it suggesting the whole thing could have been a set up. Mr Farrells past is not known and his whole back story is questionable. However, he lost his "case" for unfair dismissal based on his “religious beliefs” and started publicizing himself on You Tube and doing talks around the country.
Mr. Farrell has been promoting the “Charles Seven” story to anybody who will listen, those approached so far have declined to promote the story or take part. That is until the UK Column show, where he appeared with her on 31st Jan. The video is still on You Tube :
Having sent an e mail warning UK Column in confidence of the possible and entirely justified libel claims which could follow and a basic debunking of the untrue information presented by "Charles Seven", UK Column chose not to even respond. They passed the information to Mr. Farrell that they had been given strictly in confidence by at least two people.
This means that anyone approaching UK Column in confidence has no guarantee their information will not be passed on to third parties. The information was sent to Brian Gerrish who failed to respond and contributor Louise Collins.
It could be possible that the lawyers who are libeled believe this woman is mentally unsound and are biding their time until someone who has done no research promotes the story and they can then be taken to court. This would be one explanation as to why nobody has so far made a counter claim against her allegations.
Another likely scenario is that it is all a set up and “Charles Seven” is an operative working to entrap, gather information and/or discredit researchers and activists into the 7/7 bombings. She is certainly wasting a lot of people’s time.
“Charles Seven” also spouts New Age jargon and ideas. This “spiritual quest” angle seems to be used a lot by operatives.
The “we are spiritual” , New Age angle is a great way of manipulating people to have empathy quickly, as they are convinced by the operative that they have some kind of karmic or psychic bond. It is also used against people who question anything about the story as being unspiritual, unevolved, an “agent” or even “Satanic”. Again it all comes down to clichés and soundbites like the ones “Charles Seven” uses in the above article. (The Satanic cliche was used by her against us with other wild accusations in the diatribe reprinted below)
One high profile author and expert on 7/7 was approached by both “Charles Seven” and later Mr. Farrell to endorse the story and declined. Endorsing her story in any way would mean that all research into the events of 7/7 could easily be made to look ridiculous in the soundbite oriented media.
The fragmented nature of this woman’s recollections only confuses matters. When asked a question on a particular part of her story she will revert to the beginning of the story and start again. This is also very strange and indicates some kind of parroted learning or implanted memories. This again wastes a lot of time. She is very confident though and will spout her story to anyone with a camera. She is also very clever at manipulating scenarios to her full advantage.
Mr. Farrell states he has a “report” which contains startling revelations on her case. (It is now out and contains not one fact, see below) He also seems remarkably unperturbed and bullish towards those she implicates (as apparently do the UK Column) and also the entrapment aspect, not to mention the fact she lost the case which she states she won. (it was struck out, see above link).
Mr Farrell also used divide and rule tactics to marginalize any disagreement with the story. This also poses more questions about him than the easily debunked story he is promoting as the tactics have become classic infiltration technique of divide and rule, whilst throwing in untrue statements which take time to respond to.
The UK Column were warned of the possible repercussions yet have not taken any action to remove the video from You Tube. The result of this was that a known facilitator of activists who has fronted campaigns like the Hollie Greig case turned against the person who tried to warn both herself and the UK column about the obvious dangers. This was carried out in a malicious, manipulative and premeditated manner. There was also an attempt to divide and rule one individual against another by this “activist”.
Although this case is easy to debunk it could potentially cause division amongst groups or even serious entrapment.
As British Muslims are already aware, infiltration and entrapment are a regular occurrence and there have been many reports of this, most recently on Press TV
(Iranian/British News channel taken off the Sky Platform with no bona fide reason by Offcom and now being taken off European Satellites and worldwide for its accurate reporting and the ongoing demonizing of Iran)
Entrapment and infiltration will continue to expand and the whole UK population is already under massive surveillance through corporations with the corporates getting more and more contracts to spy on UK citizens.
There is a real need to do research and be vigilant. There are people who are so hungry for a quick fix story they can be deceived very easily. Keyboard Warriors and fools do rush in.
UPDATE April 8th:
"FARRELL REPORT": "No facts" Farrell attacks Mark Windows and Mad Scotsman for not supporting this fantasy. Here is a quote from the "report" and correct information about Farrells untrue statements.
Also: UK Column being warned and their failure to respond: Brian Gerrish did call me and appeared to also support the fantasy bringing the UK Column into question. Neither party will take up our offer to debate the debunked fantasy though. Farrell has either been completely taken in by this and/or has been sent to damage the truth movement.
The fact that it is called the "Farrell report" and not the "Charles Seven" report also speaks volumes.
I only posted an article (above) on landofthefree after having been attacked by both Belinda McKenzie and Farrell for warning UK Column of the possible consequences of publicising this easily debunked fantasy and the damage it would do to real researchers who Farrell has allied himself with.
Myself (Mark Windows) and Mad Scotsman get attacked by Farrell on page 204 of his "report". There is a further attack on myself about ten pages later.
Farrell and McKenzie were desperate to get the tapes we filmed of "Seven" from us. I had no intention of doing so as this could be interpreted as if we endorsed this fantasy, which we of course do not. (using our names on the credits for example).
The pure egotism of Farrell is in full evidence in his biographical description of himself. He also prints his "probability" assessments on a percentage scale. This is the stuff of B movie scripts.
Here is an extract from page 204/205
46) Seven’s biggest open critics have been Mark Windows and a Scottish lad named Donny – the two filmmakers who covered her harrowing interview on the 7th Anniversary of 7/7 but thenkept the footage to themselves. THE STATE COVER UP OF THE CASE MS SEVEN V GOSSAGE AND NINE OTHERS
47) In response to the UK Column interview exposing the corruption, Mark Windows tried to warn off UK Column by saying that Bindman’s Solicitors would sue them. All their previous offers to help Ms Seven suddenly sounded hollow.
When such duplicity was exposed, between the pair rof them, they waged a total blogging onslaught on both Ms Seven and myself in what seemed like a concerted effort to keep the lid on this appalling case. Undermining the authors of a report that they had not yet seen seemed an odd strategy. They did this with a whole series of childish blogs. Since filming Ms Seven desperately sad story seven months ago Mark and Don have had absolutely no contact from Ms Seven and in spite of witnessing herprevious interview when she was in tears reliv.....
Well here are the facts:
1 I did not try to "warn off" Uk Column as I sent them an e mail after the interview was uploaded. I merely sent them info on who this woman was libelling out of genuine concern, as at the time I still had respect for Brian Gerrish.
2 There was no duplicity. We stated to Farrell what we thought of the story straight away. He states: "Undermining the authors of a report that they had not yet seen seemed an odd strategy".
We were in possession of the full story through the hours of footage and documents presented which starts with untrue statements and then goes into the realms of pure fantasy. There is nothing in Farrell's final report which we were not aware of.
3 We made no promises to help, we were approached by Farrell to film an interview. The conclusion we came to was that it was pure fantasy or entrapment.
There was another film maker who filmed "Seven" at the same time as we did and then also declined to put out the footage for the same reasons but Farrell chooses not mention this.
4 True, the interview was harrowing, for us. We couldn't get a coherent story and we filmed for five hours.
5 There was no blogging onslaught, just this article which I only wrote after being attacked by both Farrell and Belinda McKenzie, who both used malicious and underhand tactics to divide a close friend from me. (If you want the e mails from her just e mail the site)
There were however some humorous remarks about this fantasy made on the UK Column interview on 31st Jan which are still there. They are funny! The malicious intent of Farrell is lightened up by highlighting the ridiculous nature of the story
6 There was no concerted effort to "keep the lid on the case". We did however want nothing to do with the story. This is also a ridiculous statement as "Seven" had posted her story on hundreds of websites.
7 In an e mail below you will note that Farrell accuses me of trying to contact "Seven" on either Facebook or Linked In which is a blatant lie which either she has fed him or he has cooked up to make us part of the "gang stalking " fantasy she promotes. Here he states the opposite. The manipulation in the e mails below is devious and aimed at placing doubts in people minds.
This whole scenario is living proof of what can happen when administrators and public servants are let loose in the real world after a lifetime of being fed statistics behind a desk (or government infiltrators put an idiot in charge of trying to discredit real researchers).
All Tony Farrell does is repeat what he has been told whilst producing no evidence. There is no forensic analysis whatsoever. He describes himself as "Principle Intelligence Analyst", this clearly is not a description of his job if he is genuine, which is so far unproven.
The "Seven" story. The fact is there are no facts.
Please feel free to circulate this article, the e mail below and all of its contents as Farrell and Belinda McKenzie have left us no option but to respond.
THE UK COLUMN AND BRIAN GERRISH
Here is my e mail to Brian Gerrish. He had sent out an e mail stating " land of the free, quoting people who dont know what they are talking about". He also made a reference to those who "Stand up and be counted"
After receiving the e mail below from myself he did call me and asked me to hold back as there was more evidence coming out. This would be of course the ridiculous "Farrell report".
He did not take me up on the offer of a live debate on the matter. He was reasonable and courteous but somehow convinced that there was merit in the story.
Can you please list the quotes you refer to from the land of the free article and name the "others, who dont know what they are talking about?"
I would like a debate on your show or a Skype interview about which parts of the article you disagree with or maintain are not true.
Your bold sweeping statement about the article is completely unwarranted. I warned you in confidence and you betrayed that confidence and failed to act on the facts presented to you.
The land of the free article is an accurate journalistic piece. The fact UK Column has entertained the ridiculous "Charles Seven" story after being sent the correct information and warned of the possible consequences completely undermines anything you promote. It also proves you do no research into what you put out publicly. No news reporter would have allowed this ridiculous story out let alone endorse it. The fact you dont acknowledge the obvious dangers of putting it out also speaks volumes.
I greatly admired your work and research on Common Purpose but endorsing complete fantasy which libels lawyers and accuses them of mass murder as this woman does (if you take five minutes to look at the article) means you undermine all real researchers and their evidence re: 7/7. It makes the research and information community look completely stupid or worse.
As for people who "stand up publicly and be counted", I recently won a case against Waltham Forest council which set a precedent and allowed me to counterclaim. The results of this case means tens of thousands of people will not get their lawful rights taken away by fraudulent third parties. I only promote what has been proved to have worked.
Some of those who "stand up and be counted" are just publicity seeking fantasists or there working to entrap others.
As you are investigating Common Purpose check out our films which proved the Occupy St. Pauls was taken over by Government agents who promoted Agenda 21 and Climate change, lead by Common Purpose trained Saskia Kent.
We also exposed the "squat" in Sun street called the Bank of Ideas which was a government set up to change the squatting laws. The links are in the article you mention which you have clearly not read properly. I never heard or read any of this on the UK Column though.
Very disappointed that UK Column promoted such obvious garbage.
The whole fantasy / entrapment story can be found at www.thefarrellreport.net.
Tony Farrell sent out a group text to activists and researchers stating he was being interviewed about "Terrorist offences" at a police station, a dangerous and suspicious thing to do. Implicating innocent people by association in a wrongly worded text.
Farrell recently suggested that two people cover a case relating to Nigel Cooper who alleged his daughter was taken by social services. This was also promoted by UK Column. The two people were arrested and allegedly charged. This info was from a close associate of Farrell but Farrell now denies this.
Farrell has urged people to listen to the audio of Judge Pumfrey. It is on his report site (link above). We heard this when we interviewed "Seven".
Here are the facts: The audio is from a case management hearing pre trial. There is banter between Pumfrey and the defence barrister. It was a bit of theatre before the case was thrown out as there was obviously no evidence. This is where she states she won the case which did not go to trial as stated above.
Farrell doesnt even know her real name. Her name on the letters is John Charles which morphs into Jean Charles as soon as he mentions Jean Charles De Menezes. This is also a gross insult to the Menezes family. So far there is not one piece of evidence.
Farrell keeps stating that I somehow tried to befriend the "Seven" character on "facebook or linked in" over Christmas and that I was obsessed with debunking the story. This is totally untrue ( the story debunks itself) and proves either how easily Mr Farrell is manipulated or how devious his insinuations are.
Farrells lies and manipulation are much in evidence in the e mails below.
Tony Farrell just made this statement:
"The title of his hit-piece is Only Fools Rush In. Where have I rushed in on this I ask myself? I have spent six months on the case and did not publish anything until I was absolutely sure.
As always there are two sides to the story and it is fair to say that you don't know mine and you don't know how Mark has gone out of his way to undermine my work and the efforst of Ms Seven."
It is a factual journalistic piece not a "hit piece"as its all true.
2 I was not even referring to Farrell in "Fools rush in", it is referring to keyboard warriors who dont do any research, although this could refer to Farrell as he has done absolutely no research on this matter.
3 I never went out of my way to "undermine" Farrell and this story. I only wrote the piece after being attacked by himself and Belinda McKenzie, when I alerted her to the fact that the story has no proof and anyone supporting it could be sued by the people wrongfully libelled. Farrell told my close friend and fellow researcher Mad Scotsman to "choose sides carefully". They underestimated the intelligence of people around them. There are absolutely no facts provided in this story.
An e mail from Belinda Mckenzie to Keep talking group and my responses in bold; Interesting for the psychological aspect.
Tony and I have been racking our brains for months as to what can have possibly got into Mark to take such a categorical, almost obsessive stance against Seven, based on what?
Answer: Real research unlike blind acceptance of a fantasy. Knowing that this case was extremely dangerous to anyone who supported the totally unfounded allegations Seven made libellous allegations against top lawyers with absolutely no evidence.
Fact: She created none of the programmes she claims. A simple IMDB search would reveal this. There is no evidence she ever worked in television or created anything.
There was no court case, she did not successfully sue ten defendants. So where was the cover up?
The faked up photo on page 4 of Tony’s report states everything about this case in pictures.
Top: A picture from an old Vogue book. On the left a studio shot of Seven, this was part of a bigger picture that she has cut down. We have seen the whole pic, it features another person, and their hand is still in the cut down pic.
On the right a mag article about make up on black skin. Inserted three pictures of Seven applying make up. The pics over lap the page and were not even part of the original article. This is because she didn’t take account of the margin. None of these images are related. She was not even in the magazine, she faked even that. The photo on the left is not even part of the magazine. It is a cut down photo and the hand of another person in the pic is left in. We have seen the original photo. The original document goes under it as the pic is not cut straight. It’s a bad fake. It is for lazy eyes to make a quick impression expecting people not to examine it.
Analogy: I get a picture of The Rolling Stones cutting out Micks head and pasting my head on his body. Then Tony states :"This is Mark Seven before Mick Jagger gang stalked him into leaving the Stones"
It’s the same with The Charlie 7 connection. This is in my article and also a good analogy for the whole case. She has put fragments of totally unrelated things together and arrived at a schizophrenic conclusion.
Her name on the letter is John Charles, when the story changes into the Jean Charles Menezes section, she miraculously becomes Jean Charles.
No stance was taken against anyone I merely warned you and The Uk Column that ‘Seven’ had libelled a lawyer on the internet whose speciality at law is internet liable. Not to mention the ludicrous 7 7 story which implicated them all in mass murder.
Here is the e mail I sent to Belinda
This is in confidence. I tried to warn UK Column. This 7 thing is hugely dangerous for anyone who allies themselves with her libelous fantasies, especially when she rants on about 7 7 being done to shut her up. Implicating people like she does in mass murder is either insanity or pure entrapment.
Hope you can see through all this. Ive attached an email from Charlotte, I responded to this one, but not again.. I dont have time for this kind of thing. It must be hard work for you at the moment.
All the best,
Here is the e mail Belinda sent me:
Sent: Wednesday, 6 February 2013, 16:19
Subject: RE: Windows here
You have done and are doing a truly terrible, horrible destructive thing, hopefully in ignorance and stupidity rather than malice or worse (Tony keeps saying you must be an agent and I keep saying no they wouldn’t have him)
“With friends like these…”
Very sad. This was such an opportunity and YOU have blown it.
Fact: When Tony phoned me and ranted down the phone I stayed calm but he slammed the phone down on me.
There was then a concerted effort between Belinda and Tony to turn Dony against me. I have all the e mails. Even suggesting his illness was because of me. Tony told Dony to “choose sides carefully”
More e mail questions answered:
On not having examined a shred of Seven’s paperwork for himself?! Which is the material fact here – he just hasn’t looked into the case because he hasn’t seen the documents!
Untrue. We went through the paperwork.
Facts: She had a case management hearing with Pumfrey.
The defendants did not bother to file a defence as they knew there was no proof of claim. They are media lawyers.
Their barrister asked for it to be struck out.
Pumfrey stated that as the documents produced by Seven were one of the best litigant in person he had seen he stated he could not strike it out. The case was to be pursued through contract and agency. This was an indication to the defence barrister that there was unlikely to be any proof of claim, as indeed there was not. There was a theatrical court banter between judge and defence , they both knew the case had no legs.
The case was struck out even before any paperwork had been submitted by the defence due to Seven not complying with a court order.
Question: What court order did she not comply with?
He only filmed a long-ish rather rambly interview of Seven before she had been trained by Tony to be brief, a film Mark no longer has, apparently, did he lose it or destroy it?
If seven had a story it would start with a fact. Why would Tony have to train her to tell the truth? We did extensive research on her and found that nothing she told us was true.
And now Kevin is saying it’s easy for M15 to have faked 10 bundles’ worth of documents. Why would they bother to do that, pray? Bearing in mind they must have started doing so back in 2003-4 before the Truth movement had even been born in this country and a whole 10 years before Tony F produces the report on Seven’s case.
Tonys document is not a report. It is cobbled together heresay and wild speculation with no analysis. It is merely a mouthpiece for Sevens wild allegations.
Well I know what an all-powerful and amazing and hyper-efficient security service M15 is! but faking 10 bundles of documents which have been through the courts over a whole decade, plus a full audio-transcript of an appeal hearing before a very well-known judge, in which the judge praised Seven’s presentation of her case and said it would go to trial, IT DIDN’T THOUGH judge now dead but anyone listening to that would know instantly it was Pumfrey speaking;
Then there’s the gang-stalking and intimidation campaign mounted against Seven, how do Mark and co. account for that? Seven filed reports to the police about it around 60 times and obtained written confirmation each time of her attendance at the police station, not that any action was taken on their part.
If she had reported incidents to police 60 times why has she not been threatened with wasting police time? Anyone can report anything to the police, it is proof of nothing. The reason a call is made to the police after a threat is that the alleged intention is on record in case the threat is carried out and there is a timeline. She went on a few occasions about all these incidents but there was never any evidence to back it up. Why was she not carrying a tiny camera with her at all times? Why no recording of phone calls on her I phone? She stated she had threatening phone calls.
Evidence for the surveillance operation against her carried out from the hotel building opposite her flat was destroyed earlier this year in a horizontal fire across the entire 5th floor of the building which is on a level with her flat. As reported in the Evening Standard, 25 fire-engines attended the incident!
There was a fire in the hotel over the road. What connection does a building over the road having a fire have to Seven? It was a run down hotel with bad reviews so it was most probably an insurance job.
This surveillance operation was experienced by Tony himself when he stayed in the flat over Christmas prior to the fire and saw the lenses in the windows opposite also he was followed every time he exited the building to take a walk. On one occasion he wheeled round and accosted the cameraman, who ran away in a panic!
Why did Tony not have someone with him filming from a distance at all times? Why was Tony not able to supply any proof. The best way to prove it would be to film or take photos. Cameras can be same size as a coin so no excuse.
If the Truth movement is worth its mettle, based on what Mark Windows alleges, namely that Seven’s case is a scam engineered to entrap and discredit members of the movement, we should write our own report exposing the extraordinary lengths to which the state and MI5 have felt compelled to go in order to destroy us, a phenomenon of our time surely itself remarkable and worthy of scrutiny.
The Seven case has nothing to do with the truth movement as it is not true. It could do damage if it got into the mainstream media and discredit truth movement completely. With Sevens and Tonys egos pushing this fantasy that is a strong possibility.
No corroborating independent record: COVER-UP COVER-UP COVER-UP
Name Charles Seven: entirely in keeping with all the other weird names people call themselves or their kids these days eg Harper 7 Beckham.
Not relevant: Its not her name. It is a way of connecting her character to 7 7.
London bombings carried out to threaten and get at her: in the situation she’s been in she might be forgiven for being slightly paranoid but as I have understood from her she didn’t actually claim that,
Actually she did. Its in her own blog, why have you not seen it? It is on many sites all over the internet. I linked it to my article Here is what seven says in the first lines of her blog:
Seven: "7/7 was in reality a media, mafia, ritualistc, satanic ,witch hunt vendetta to psychologically torture, terrify and paralyse me into not bringing my evidence to court, exposing conspiracy to defraud and murder by way of widespread racketeering of trillions using stolen intellectual property and other highly sinister activities from 2003 onwards."
Belindas statement is untrue and once again proves she has done no research.
only that she sensed in advance they were going to happen and reported her forebodings several times to the police, as usual obtaining a note from them confirming she’d done that.
Many people have premonitions; it has nothing to do with her case which is in fact about intellectual copyright theft which she was unable to prove. The 7 7 bombings were added on for effect.
But she did think the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes in which he had 7 bullets in the head might well have been done to terrorise her, along with murders of her close friends and the judge who believed in her.
That is once again psychosis and making connections, which are not there. Which close friends were murdered, and why would that have a direct connection to her? Surely, its easier to murder the target than mess about.
“Falling for this rubbish”: truth can be stranger than fiction sometimes and if only people would check the FACTS before having this knee-jerk response “it’s weird so it must be rubbish”, just isn’t good enough from a 21st c seeker after truth.
There was no knee jerk response, we did hours of research on her which is hours more than Tony and Belinda have done.
It is not stranger than fiction , it is fiction. You have clearly not checked the facts , neither has Tony, he has just entertained a story and put it into a template with an index.
There is not one provabale fact in this story. The story starts with a lie and becomes a fantasy
MORE UPDATES: 12 APRIL
More e mails and wild accusations. Mr. Farrell is getting increasingly nasty. As for the Seven character we are now "satanic rascists". Theres even a dig about Frank O Collins. Please draw your own conclusions.
Dear Muad Dib,
I have been discussing amongst friends this total blogging onslaught being waged by Mark Windows on the Kent Freedom Movement Website.
See below for link.
Ms Seven has been asked a few questions from Mark Windows and other members of the 9/11 Keep Talking Group. These questions have been channeled through Belinda who has gently asked Ms Seven and myself to consider the answers.
My question to you is this:
Do you approve if we submit Ms Seven's response to the KFM website?
Please see below for Ms Seven's reply (red) to the questions asked of her as passed on via Belinda (blue). Eddie Boyce and Deborah Williams appear to be heavily influenced by Mark Windows. They withdrew their support for me without reading the report although Eddie did promise to read it and have a word with you. In response to the questions channeled via Belinda, I also relied to her - my reply to Belinda is shown in green below.
Any thoughts? Friends think Seven's text should be submitted as a test to see if KFM are prepared to give Ms Seven a fair crack of the whip.
Why is he asking a third party who has nothing to do with the story? This is more manipulation. The Kent Freedom Movement are influenced by no one, they read the whole of Farrells "report"
A message from The "Charles Seven" character: This is very revealing but may also be a ploy.
Mark Windows and Dom and we now suspect others from the 'do nothing' and 'keep talking group', are blatant enemy agents, working hard to prevent the truth I speak going viral..
Other people have also come forward to alert us about Mark Windows and Dom and their nasty evil crew because they have also used the same tactics attempting to cause discord and damage in other arenas.. They have earned a nasty reputation now of being notorious. So don't be taken in or fooled by their motives.
They are being outed by their own actions.
Their questions are Bullshit, so I will not waste a second on them.
They are cold very sick twisted evil people trying to profit for themselves on the back of mine and others prolonged abuse pain and suffering period. This will not be tolerated.
Any legitimate person interested in my case and circumstances as a targeted individual, should realise Windows and Dom are 'perps' or hired service operatives working for the otherside. Do your own research and read the report and appendices to get the truth and facts for yourselves. Everything I state is backed up by deep scars, hard evidence and many many witnesses.
All produced is factual and genuine.. I would not be exposing this truth otherwise!! If anyone thinks this is fun for any of us, they are blind.
These evil people have made mine and others life hell for almost 10 years.. And I intend to out every last one of them until the truth is known worldwide and justice is fully done no more no less.
As you already know, I have suffered much and watched many beautiful people murdered to keep this ugly situation concealed.. Therefore I will not tolerate evil agents like Windows and his pathetic side kick for a second. They will be fully exposed for the evil nasty agents of the state that they are.
The mere fact that they are going way way way over and beyond what any normal people would do to block the truth coming out by leaving nasty sick lies to dissuade others paying attention, shows clearly they are hired hands working for the enemy. Everyone can see that.
Tell them I said.. May you rot in the depths of hell for what they are attempting to do.. It won't work because the truth is marching on.. They are evil racist scum jealous haters, posing as truthers, trying to make themselves look credible by aligning themselves with Kevin Annette and other genuine truth campaigners..
Tell them to stop hiding and pull out your 'white hoods' and Nazi outfits and stand up like real men to show people who you really are, racist hater enemy agent!!! We are all on to you!!!
How dare they try to conceal my nearly 10 years of horrific torture and abuse and the death of beautiful innocent people? They are bang out of order. Who do they think they are playing with?
Besides me, they have tried to malign Tony Farrell, who is an up standing man of the highest conviction and integrity, Brian Gerrish another up standing man of the highest integrity and even a man who came to my rescue to get me out of hiding after being left to rot there for six months called Rebel.. I even see that they are trying to malign and discredit you now Belinda., it's thoroughly despicable.
How dare these low calibre racist scum try to discredit honourable people, who are risking everything in their lives to bring about truth peace and justice? They have proven themselves sick and evil beyond words.
This is way bigger than them, this time they are really messing with the wrong people, they may have got away with causing havoc before in other groups but they will not this time. They expose themselves by their evil foolish treacherous actions.
Anyone listening to the nasty likes of scumbag Windows and his side kick is being grossly misguided, so should study the report for themselves, and shun Windows and Dom less they go down with them.
They are very shortsighted and don't realise that once they have fulfilled their paymasters usefulness, they too will be quickly disposed of like all other agents! I have seen it happen many times before to others. So if they think they stand to gain by what they are doing.. It will be short lived as their criminal devil worshipping paymasters have no loyalty to anyone, as can be seen by what happened to Judge Pumfrey.
Every document produced is authentic, and I really don't have time for the childish games of enemy agents working to protect the interests of criminals and devil worshipping psychopaths hell bent on abusing people and getting away with it so that they can bring about their satanic new world order.
Much love to you B..
I'd tell Windows and Dom and the rest of their nasty devil agent crew to 'get thee behind me Satan' if I was you. They have proved themselves as evil and rotten to the core.
Warn others to shun and stay away from them period let them go down in their pit of hell alone.
Feel free to post and circulate this email everywhere.
Blessings and Love
Well it was with "Blessings and love"!
It looks like myself and Mad Scotsman are the "Targeted Individuals" here!
It was suggested Seven answer some questions (not mine It was through Belinda)
Seven has a point.
Mark has maligned you massively to your face so why are you still trying to appease him? He has abused your hospitality and kindness and attempted to bully you into an apology when none was owed. The apology should have been the other way round. Michael Mullen had him worked out straightaway.
(Untrue, I asked for an apology for her irrational behaviour. She turned against me as soon as I sent an e mail warning her of the dangers of supporting this story. There was also the attempted manipulation of my friend who both herself and Farrell tried desperately to turn against me.
When Belinda attended a private meet up she was not invited to, Michael Murrin was with her and doing amateur psychology on me , so I called him out on it) If you want the evidence E mail the site and I will send this thread of e mails.
If you respond to Mark in this way, I fear he'll have you running around in circles and if we are not careful he'll just keep coming up with a countless array of questions, many of the answers of which can be obtained in the report itself if only they would read it. (Untrue, his report is just heresay and answers no questions, this is more manipulation)
It's not for you to defend the report. Don't act as the go between here. This will distract you from other work. The 9/11 Keep Talking Group is not the centre of the universe and not as important as they like to think they are.
I have good reason to believe that other things on Mark are about to come to light. (more sinister insinuation from Farrell, are Farrell and Co about to spread more lies? More reversal, as more things about him are "coming to light")
I will not deal with him as his pre-occupation is to try to destroy Ms Seven. He won't succeed! He has met his match I think. (But still no answer to our basic two questions: What is her name? Did she win her court case?)
Truthers in this group should be reading the report and researching SMG, Bindman's, Tamsin Allen, Leveson Brian Nicholson, Justice Lawrence Collins, Helen Mary Alexander and Jim Manson's rather than launching a total onslaught against brave Ms Seven. They are looking at this from the wrong perspective. They need to wake up. Some are just blind, others like Mark are deceitful. (more reversal from Farrell) Which ones are which will be revealed in the fulness of time. (well the truth about his fantasy has now been revealed)
Certain members of the 9/11 Keep Talking Group are saying they won't read a 240 page report yet they cry out for evidence and facts. They can't have it both ways. They are showing themselves up as idiots. ( definite reversal!)
Even Kevin Boyle is puzzling. He goes on record as wondering why I did this yet in the same breath openly refuses to read the report to find out why. Is he frightened that he might discover that he has been blind to this? It's no disgrace to discover that one has been wrong all along about someone. (Kevin researched the matter like everyone else farrell has so far accused of not doing so, the only person who has not researched the matter is Farrell himself)
I am happy to deal direct with Ian Fantom once he has had an opportunity to read the report and give his own thoughts as chairperson of the group.I have invited him to do as much. I have even offered to meet up with him upon my return to England whenever that may be.
Why on earth should Seven be expected to answer any of these questions amidst such abuse and hostility (there has been no abuse or hostility, more obsfucation) especially when members can't be arsed to look at the report is beyond me? The real truthers will come through this and do their own research and make their own minds up. That won't happen instantly.
Mark says there is absolutely no evidence. That is laughable. If they are not prepared to read the 240 page report, look at the appendices and listen to the tapes they won't see any of the evidence will they? (There is no "evidence" in the report, this is a fact)
Finally, be strong this is spiritual warfare at its best. If they want to know the name of Seven's brother, tell them if they can't be bothered to read the report to find out then ask them to read the Writing Is On the Wall. It's in the bible! (It is spiritual warfare for those who have had to suffer this fantasy and be accused by Farrell)
PS Charlotte informed me that Mark is heavily influenced by this guy who boasts about being Jesuit trained. See link below.
Yes - thanks - we've seen it already. Self-important sideswipe from a man who also might refer to himself (and his leader Frank O Collins) as "spiritual".
People pick up the traits of their teachers in a budding personality cult.
(This reveals how uninformed and deluded these fantasts are, as I stated Keyboard warriors and fools do rush in)
More underhand infiltration technique. Well, this is all very revealing and there has been even more since.
Who does Tony Farrell think he is? Maybe we will soon find out.
Our questions should now be directed at Farrell. Where is the proof he was what he says he was, as he clearly is not what he claims to be.
He claims he has chosen to "dissappear" as he is in "fear of his life" after releasing his "report". (More likely being debriefed or re instructed after recent events)
This is what I stated he would do before his ridiculous report came out, yet he is still desperately attacking (mostly) Mark Windows, Mad Scotsman and other credible researchers including Kent Freedom Movement..
In fact every researcher who has questioned Farrell has now been attacked by him and is of course a "dis info agent". As Farrell has now resorted to lies and manipulation there is bound to be much more to come.
The main fact about this story is it is wasting time of researchers with better things to do. Farrells constant e mails to people are designed to get long responses. Well, we are just going to use shorter ones.
Who are you? Why are you promoting a non story? Why are you making accusations and implications desperately trying to divide researchers and groups?
UPDATES: APRIL 16TH
David Pidcock joins in. All these "attacks" are now the same kind of verbiage with no actual content. It would make a good classical theatre or medieval Town Cryer monologue though.
On 14 Apr 2013, at 16:50, David Pidcock wrote:
> MARK WINDOWS IS CLEARLY A LIAR, AN ESTABLISHMENT SHILL - INDEED THE ULTIMATE "CAUCASIAN IN THE SNOWDRIFTS OF THE KFM AND OTHER MOVEMENTS DEDICATED TO EXPOSING THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH. WHO'S ANIMOSITY, SARCASTIC INSINUATIONS AND VENAL DISSEMBLINGS ARE FAR TOO OBNOXIOUS TO BE APPRECIATED. WHO MUST NOT BE ALLOWED TO GET AWAY WITH THE IDEA THAT WE WILL TOLERATE SUCH DESPICABLE DOUBLE DYED TREACHERY.
> TO BOTH OF WINDOWS TWO FACES - I SWEAR THAT TONY FARREL IS TELLING THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH!
> DAVID PIDCOCK
> Sent from my iPhone
E mails between Ian Fantom and Tony Farrell reveal Farrells use of "reversal".
After Mr. Farrell has been stating I may have posted e mails without Ian Fantoms consent, here is the complete thread of e mails between Ian and Tony which Ian has now asked to be posted.
Farrell makes untrue statements and insinuations throughout. I have only put italicised comments after the most obvious and devious lies.
Correspondence with Tony Farrell, April 2013
Why not read the report, the appendices, listen to the audio tapes and watch offensive - the story of Tony Farrell FIRST before you do your next probability assessments on us being shills and before you comment on KFM so negatively?
CONDEMNATION WITHOUT INVESTIGATION . . .
Who is KFM? To what document are you refering? Where is the condemnation?
After the help and sympathetic hearing we gave you, I have been
surprised at your tone.
Mark Windows appears to have inserted some communication that appears to be yours from the 9/11 Heep Talking Group and posted it on the Kent Freedom Movement Website. It is signed Ian. Please see below.
If the text below is not taken from your words, then I apologise, but for sure Mark is certainly making it look as if it is from you. Are you denying that these words are not originally from you?
A few comments from The 9 11 Keep talking group:I agree.
Mark's work was diligent.
It's not so much Charles Seven that I'm worried about, but Tony Farrell. Charles Seven did not come across convincingly when she spoke at length about her case at Belinda's (see my newsletter), and neither did her friend whom she had brought along to back her story up.
I could not figure out how a Principal Intelligence Analyst could be
taking her seriously, even if she had masses of evidence she wasn't
telling us about. His attitude in expecting us to believe the story on
the grounds that he had been through the evidence which we weren't being shown goes against the whole culture of the truth movement.
Virtually everything that Tony Farrell said and did up to his
resignation from this group told me that he was genuine. But everything
he said and did following that seemed to tell a different story.
I expect there'll be more on this when we've studied the Farrell Report
in more depth.
I see no "probability assessments on us being shills".
I would be grateful if you could answer my question. Are these your words please? Did you give your permission and do you approve of Mark depicting you as saying this?
I would be grateful if you would tell me what relevance that quoted text has to your allegation against me.
CONDEMNATION WITHOUT INVESTIGATION ?
Believiing that they were your words,and you have still not clarified as per my request - I fekt it premature of you to infer that I am somehow disingenuous. You appear to have judged Ms Seven without ever having looked at her material. Yes she has difficulty putting her case over in a nutshell but there are extenuating circumstances in her case and I am convinced that she has been massively victimised.
Now assuming they are your words and forgive me but your evasiveness over the simple question suggests they are - then you appear to be judging me before you have read the report I have made available for all and sundry to see. I wanted to clarify whether they were your words or whether Mark Windows was misrepresenting you on the KFM website in an attempt to sway people against Ms Seven and I.
A while back, I announced to the 9/11 Group that I felt that there was something to Ms Seven's case. I raised expectations that I would be in a position to deliver on something sooner than actually occurred. I slowed myself down as I realised the importance and seriousness of the case. It was complex. I was convinced that this case is important because I had looked at the files. Sure it was complex and yes Ms Seven is somewhat different from the norm and not always easy to fathom out. That said, I became supportive of her and was open about this. The more I delved the more complex and serious the case became. This was no game. This is serious stuff. There is a decade of gangstalking with which to contend. There are suspicious deaths and potential linkages with 7/7 and the assassination of Jean Charles De Menezes. At first hearing this sounds implausible, but the more I delved the more I became persuaded that there might be something in what she was saying.Alone, I gave her the benefit of the doubt and worked with her to gain her trust and understand how her mind worked.
I was hopeful of getting other researchers interested before I put my report together. The report took longer than anticipated because of the serious consequences of the allegations within.
The fact that nobody from 8/11 Truth particularly warmed to Ms Seven was largely irrelevant. That in itself does not make her a shill. Most certainly, It did not deter me as I alone had invested the time to unpick her case.I was obviously mindful of what was being said about her and some of her idiosyncratic tendencies. However I felt her to be genuine even if I did not agree with all her theorising. I had no doubt she had been a victim and no doubt that there had been a massive cover-up. Her case is as very sad as it is astonishing.
I resigned from the 9/11 Keep Talking Group not because I had fallen out with anyone leat of all you but because like Mad Dib and Tony Rooke I felt the utter evil behind 9/11 and 7/7 and our foreign policy agenda demanded something much more than talk. I remained on friendly terms with everyone and was happy to socialise as normal while I was still staying at Belinda's. I helped to arrange for David Pidcock to come and give a talk to the group.
I did not share your probability assessments of Muad Dib or Tony Rooke but I did not take sides against you for seeing things from a different perspective. I always enjoyed your thoughts and gentle manner.
I would still welcome your comments on the report and tapes if you are prepared to read and listen to the material with a open mind. If your mind is made up about Ms Seven then I guess it's a futile request.
I have no wish to fall out and you are entitled to your opinions but I would appreciate clarification of the source of those negative comments that were made in your name. I hope you will respond with an answer either way.
It was I who was asking for clarification from you about the allegation against me which you made in your email. You accused me of "CONDEMNATION WITHOUT INVESTIGATION", with reference to "probability assessments on us being shills".
When I investigated that you quoted a text which did not appear to contain any allegation of mine of you being "shills" or of any probability assessment on this.
Whoever originally wrote the text which you quoted, it seems that you are guilty of exactly what you have accused me of.
I would welcome an explanation.
When Tony Rooke and Muad Dib resigned from the 9/11 Keep Talking Group you voluntarily offered up to me your own probability assessments on both of these two dear friends of mine being shills at various points in time according to their changing behaviour. From recollection the probability assessments were scored were very high. In effect you were saying to me that you thought both were shills but weren't 100 per cent sure. I happened not to share any of those opinions you expressed in your assessments but I was quite chilled about it. Admittedly, I followed their example and resigned but that was done on friendly terms. I had no axe to grind with anyone. On the contrary, I was very grateful for all the support and friendship I had enjoyed from many of the members. I suppose I was frustrated that Rookie's rallying cry did not get a better following from the rest of the group members. That was all.
So that said, upon seeing your negative comments about me and Ms Seven on a public post put up by Mark Windows attributable to you yesterday, I was curious as the comments seemed inconsistent with your normal evidence based approach.
It can't have escaped your attention that a further schism has emerged between Mark Windows and myself. This has been triggered by Mark's behaviour towards Ms Seven. (Untrue insinuations)
On the 6th July 2012, Mark and Don come to my aid as friends of mine at that time and filmed Ms Seven. Ms Seven's case was very complex and Seven out-poured her story in front of the camera. It lasted hours. I found it a very sad and moving story. This was not easy for Ms Seven as she had to recollect very traumatic events in her life. It was a very long interview and admittedly could have been shorter but that's how it was.
Having filmed Ms Seven, Mark and Don went out and did some research and expressed one or two reservations about Ms Seven. I weighed up what they were saying carefully at all times. Sure Ms Seven had certain idiosyncrasies and made bold claims about 7/7 which seemed at first glance implausible or misplaced.
My take on all this was different from Mark's. Mark Window's was keen to find fault with her story. (untrue, I merely asked questions which any journalist would) He was concerned with birth certificates and her name. (Which no one yet knows)
On the other hand, I saw Ms Seven first and foremost as credible victim of massive outrageous gangstalking (with no evidence) and courtroom corruption with potential insight into 7/7 which although somewhat unfathomable at first glance nevertheless merited further scrutiny. This case was different. Seven was different. What is more she had damning audio tapes which had the potential to expose massive court corruption. Without the audio tapes as evidence, I doubt I'd have pursued the case.
I persuaded Mark to do a second shorter interview of Seven a few weeks later. However, events were overtaken by work on a different interview of Ms Seven filmed by Stan of d'Alone fame.Unfortunately, much wasted energy was spent on Stan's film as Ms Seven in her own idiosyncratic way frustrated us all by trying to put too many bells and whistles on what was after all just a straight forward interview that could have been uploaded immediately. For one reason or another, it never got developed as when I was off the scene in Birmingham, Ms Seven became a bit isolated and was not comfortable in the company of certain members residing at the household at that time.While away, I could see her great potential as a witness but she needed some help. She had flaws in her delivery of her message. Nothwithstanding this, I saw her case as potentially dynamite but I realised that Ms Seven who had endured a terrible ordeal lasting nearly ten years could not do this part alone. She needed help and support. She had single handedly taken on the establishment in the courts and her case files were astonishing to read.
In the autumn, I dropped everything I was doing in Birmingham to focus on her case in London. There was court bundles to scrutinize and a decade of gang-stalking to understand. The case has very unusual features. I knew that to get my head around her bold claims about 7/7 and assess merits, I had to know the nature of the gang-stalking first. Only then could I pass judgment from an anlysts perspective.
Towards the approach to the Christmas break in 2012, I was becoming very immersed in the case. I let it be known to several of the the 9/11 Keep Talking Group members that I was becoming persuaded that there were some real merits in her case. I was going to stick with it. I raised expectations of an imminent report. This was not easy because I was surrounded by several friends staying at Belinda's who all had doubts about Ms Seven. I did not want to be unduly influenced by the doubters until I had at least got my head around the entire case material.Days before Just before Christmas I recall a nice conversation I had with Mark Windows. Mark offered to help me and even offered to drop off the tapes of the earlier filming of Seven on the 7th anniversary. We briefly discussed Bindman's Law Firm and Mark mentioned that they were a set of nasty bastards not to messed with. (I actually said they would be perfectly entitled to bring a libel case)
Ms Seven however had let it be known that she did not trust Mark one bit. She kept her concerns private but was appreciative of the thought that he might be about to receive the tapes of his filming of her earlier interview with me. Over Christmas, I stayed at Seven's flat alone in order to free up Belinda's room for her family and simultaneously get access to all of Ms Seven's many court files. Ms Seven was staying elsewhere but would visit me every day to help me with the report I was compiling. Over Christmas, Seven mentioned that Mark Windows was trying to befriend her on either facebook or linknd. (This is a bare faced lie and shows how easily Mr Farrell is manipulated)
Mark never handed over either of those tapes of the two interviews he did of us in spite of making promises just before Christmas that he would do.There was no mention that he'd overwritten them.
After Christmas, I stayed at Seven's alone in her vacant flat. I returned to Belinda's late January but only after I had drafted the report in full. During that time, I had a chance meeting with Don in the House of Commons. I shared with Don my developing hopes about the potential of the Seven case to expose corruption. (untrue, Don merely greeted him as he was busy filming)
I told Don that I was becoming increasingly persuaded that her case was massive. The court files were astonishing. Our short meeting was perfectly friendly. Don listened to me and appeared supportive and said little or nothing negative against Ms Seven. Don even mentioned a suspicious incident he'd witnessed outside Belinda's house. (untrue) .
Don and I had discussed Jean Charles De Menezes and we very much saw it the same way - that this cold blooded murder of JCDM was in all probability not a case of mistaken identity.
(Untrue , this is another bare face lie, divide and rule psychology by Farrell)
Meanwhile back at Belinda's, there was a fall-out between two occupants. Don and Mark will both know about this but I was largely detached. As far as I was concerned I was on very good terms with Mark, Don and everyone else at the household.I had not taken sides against anyone and since I was at Ms Seven's flat alone, I was not sensitive to what was unfolding.
I had other concerns as between 18th and 23rd January, I witnessed first hand the putrid nature of the stalking Ms Seven had endured. This was now directed against me. It's all in the report. I was under constant surveillance and it was overt, brazen and disgusting. While I was at Seven's there were many stalking incidents.The Met police were at best hopeless at worst complicit whenever we went to them for help. I witnessed this. (But has no proof)
Brian Gerrish and Mike Robinson came to London to see Ms Seven and I. We spent a day going through the draft report and we agreed that it would be good to do an interview together. When we did the UK Column interview on 31st January 2013, I heard through the grapevine that Mark Windows had become curious as to why I was taking Ms Seven to Plymouth.
(Not true, I did not know about any trip to Plymouth and only sent the e mail to warn UK Column after I saw it on You Tube. Farrell is trying to bulid up a picure that I was somehow obsessed with this case, again reversal by Farrell)
After that interview Mark sent an email to Lou Collins warning the UK Column about Ms Seven. That email was passed on to me. (As I stated the UK Column betrayed confidence)
I was irritated with Mark for doing this.The subsequent communication exchanges between Mark, Donny and myself were not friendly. As you will be aware the respective positions are now polarised.Mark claimed he had acted behind my back to protect me. I felt that was totally disingenuous.He harps on about Ms Seven's birth certificate. (Untrue, we harp on about the fact there are no facts to her story)
To my mind, that's rich coming from him. He cites official court verdicts yet misses the whole point we are making about the corruption and skullduggery within the court system. (Untrue, we fully analysed the court tapes) He builds his own campaigning around invalidating the court system as if its an entertainment business (deliberately confuses my background in entertainment with my serious journalistic work and victories in court) yet switches his allegiance and defends its validity to try to blow away a brave lady willing to stand up against white might. (This is plain ridiculous and indicates the lack of intellect in the simplistic reversal techniques he uses)
Frankly I am utterly disgusted with Mark's blogging and attempted character assassination and unwarranted laddish innuendos of Ms Seven on the UK Column blog site. He went beserk on his own site too. (Untrue, I have only ever written one article and it is above, it was Farrell and Belinda Mckenzie who attempted "character assasination" on me as the E mails reveal)
Whether he believes Ms Seven or not, his antics are unacceptable. Because of his behaviour post UK Column interview, I took the decision to expose some of his antics. (What antics?) Read for yourself what I wrote. Once the report was unleashed he rapidly blogged what he did on the KFM. (Untrue, the KFM started the blog after Farrell had attacked me). Frankly, Ms Seven feels that Mark Window's is joining in the stalking of her. I am inclined to agree. (This like all Farrels posts and is simple reversal)
A brave lady stands up against these evil monsters and certain so called Truth Movement activists seem more preoccupied in destroying her rather the waging war against the evil bastards that did 7/7.
(Farrell cannot accept that we are not at all interested in "Seven" or her fantasy. We have much more important things to do and researching 7/7 has actually been one of them, way before Farrell appeared on the scene in 2010. See 7/7 Revisited on our You Tube channel.)
No longer do I believe him to be trustworthy. (reversal) He has lied about his position on the tapes. (Why are they so desperate to get their hands on them? It could be that the fantasy does fall apart in the "interviews" very quickly)
He failed to mention that he had actually agreed to hand them over before Christmas. He tries to befriend Seven while secretly undermining her. (more reversal and a Blatant lie)
When Belinda and I asked him for the tapes after the fallout, his tune changed and he is on record as saying that he recorded over them. Whether he has recorded them or not, it is entirely inconsistent with his utterances just before Christmas when he was going to get them for us.
So all that said, when I saw Mark post a blog of text in your name, quite naturally I wanted some explanation as to the source as it was clear that the comments were made before you yourself had had the opportunity to read the report. That seemed inconsistent with what I believed to be your normal business ethical standards. Given Mark's posting of your comments, I wanted to know whether you approved of his actions and stood by the comments made in your name on the KFM website.
I have no axe to grind with you but it looks as though from where I sit that you have taken sides against me and Ms Seven well before you have read my report. (not again!) I hope I am mistaken here but so be it if you have. As I have said before, I have valued your work as chair of the 9/11 Keep Talking Group and while I am nolonger a participant in that forum, I do not have anything bad to say about the members other than Mark Window's. (never!) Finally, while I disagree with you about your assessment of Muad Dib and Tony Rooke, I did not consider it a matter for us to fall out. As far as I am concerned, we have not fallen out.
I trust I have answered your question.
For all your lengthy explanation, you have not shown me how the text which you quoted had contained any accusation of mine that you were a "shill", as you put it. Instead, you yourself have accused Mark Windows of being a shill.
Our exchanges following your resignation from our email group occurred long before I had heard of Charles Seven, and bore no relation to her case. I was trying to bring you back into the fold, or at least to keep up the contact on a basis of free exchange of ideas. I was puzzled at your resignation, which appeared to be in sympathy with Tony Rooke and Muad Dib, who had left the group after I had put them under moderation.
In the case of Muad Dib, I reported a probability assessment of 50% following his resignation. That hardly conforms to your description of "In effect you were saying to me that you thought both were shills but weren't 100 per cent sure". Quite to the contrary: it means I didn't know.
Both of them, but Tony Rooke in particular, were undermining the fundamental idea on which the group was formed. None of us was discouraging anyone from taking action other than talking; far from it - we were encouraging people to do their own thing. We had been supportive of your work, Muad Dib's work, and Tony Rooke's work.
You wrote: "I resigned from the 9/11 Keep Talking Group not because I had fallen out with anyone leat of all you but because like Mad Dib and Tony Rooke I felt the utter evil behind 9/11 and 7/7 and our foreign policy agenda demanded something much more than talk." So what were you doing other than talking? You and Tony Rooke had been talking more than most. Last time we met I made the point to you that it may be better not to keep talking about something big that you were going to do, but just to keep quiet until you are ready to actually do it. If you weren't willing to tell us what it was, and to ask for help, then all you would be achieving would be to give the opposition notice of intent, so that they could find a way of intervening. Your constant talking about this could only have been designed to impress us, rather than the outside world. Again, what you were doing, in claiming that we were just talking, was another example of reversal.
You came to us with a story that you had been dismissed as Principal Intelligence Officer with South Yorkshire Police. We met with you before you gave your talk to the Keep Talking group. What is that if not talking?
Now you are condemning me for 'CONDEMNATION WITHOUT INVESTIGATION'. But what is the 'condemnation' that you refer to? The text which you quoted stated: "It's not so much Charles Seven that I'm worried about, but Tony Farrell". Are you accusing anyone who does not entirely believe what you tell them of 'condemnation'? You appear to be doing so.
Perhaps I should have checked your story out right at the beginning, rather than believing what you were telling us about South Yorkshire Police. My resources for investigating that were limited, but let's now make a start.
What evidence can you provide to me that you were sacked by South Yorkshire Police? What evidence can you provide as to the reason for your sacking, showing that it was not because of incompetence, or because you were allowing your religious fervour to override analytical assessment? What evidence can you provide that you were not merely redeployed to another role?
Your text discredits Ms Seven on an open website, even before you have seen the evidence in my report. That's the point. You were condemning me for supporting her before reading my evidence.
Do what you will, your mind seems squarely made up on this.
I have tried to be conciliatory to you personally but it's clear I'm wasting my time in that pursuit unless or until you read the report properly and comment on it in a more constructive and reasonable manner.
If you go to the website you can see in the last section the events before Judge Rostant and and then Judge Little. Eddie Boyce, Debbie Williams, Jeffrey, Kevin Boyle, Belinda McKenzie, Rory Ridley-Duff and Nick Kollerstrom all attended in Sheffield and can vouch for what happened. More will be uploaded in the next few days. Your insinuation that somehow I may not ave worked for South Yorkshire Police is utterly absurd. Are you telling me that these spectators think it somehow was a stage show?
This is not about Charles Seven; it's about you. Indeed, the text which you quoted states: "It's not so much Charles Seven that I'm worried about, but Tony Farrell." On that basis, you accused me of making an allegation that you were a "shill".
Mark Windows' point that she may be putting both you and Brian Gerrish in a situation in which you could be sued for lible needed to be taken seriously. I believe he was acting in good faith.
At the time you were saying that you had the evidence, but that you weren't going to show it to him. There remained a possibility that this was a setup.
Your insinuation that anyone who doesn't wholeheartedly embrace your story is accusing you of being a "shill" is not the sort of behaviour that I would expect from a Principal Intelligence Analyst. Nor is your further insinuation that Mark Windows is a "shill".
That line of argument is valid whether or not Charles Seven is genuine. I therefore think that there are grounds for having concerns about you.
I should have thought that most people would interpret such a statement as suggesting that you were allowing your religious belief system to overrule your professional judgement.
You condemned me for "CONDEMNATION WITHOUT INVESTIGATION", yet you yourself were expecting our support when you were condemning South Yorkshire Police. Are there double standards at work here?
Any investigation should look at all possibilities. It could be that the real reason that you were sacked was that your professional judgement was in question in view of your religious beliefs. After all, your appeal to the employment tribunal was based on religious discrimination, or so you told us. That would seem to be rather curious grounds for an appeal given the story you had told us. That is just one possibility. Another is that you were transferred to the London Metropolitan Police for undercover work, and that you could legitimately state that you no longer work for the South Yorkshire Police. Another possibility is that you were completely genuine, but going over the top on the religion. I think that any intelligent third party reading this correspondence would have some concerns at your use of reversal in your dealing with me.
Where did you do your statistics degree?
I don't fear being sued. I am not afraid of Bindmans. If you read the report you'll see exactly why that is so. We won't defeat this evil by being afraid of it. It needs confronting head on and with love.
Might I suggest something. Let's take a break from emailing like this. I urge you to suspend all judgment of me and Ms SEVEN. I urge you to read the report from start to finish. Listen to the audio tape video Judge Pumfrey is Dead..Watch Tony Rooke's video if you haven't already done so. It's all there on the website. Once you have done that, then I would be willing to re-engage. I'd like to meet up for a coffee in a fortnight or so and have a chat and perhaps we can discuss this amicably whatever our differences? I am far away from London at that momnent waiting for the dust to settle before I plan to return.
As for Mark. I wish him no harm, but he should cease being abusive to Ms Seven forthwith (I have never been "abusive" to the Seven character this is devious insinuation which he uses alongside his fake Christianity) and start reading the report properly with an open mind. He should read the appendices too. I did not call him out for nothing. He got the treatment he deserved. I said he was the biggest critic of Ms Seven and exposed some of his antics. They were disgusting. (he may be referring to light hearted banter about Tuna and Mackerel which myself and Mad Scotsman indulged in for some light relief from Farrells insinuations, yes these were directed at him)
He does not have to keep up the pretense. What matters here is not these petty squabbles but overturning the corruption and injustice in society.
This is the last email I intend to send you. I hope you can find it in yourself to read the report and if you do then I'd be delighted to receive your considered thoughts.
I intend studying your report in any case, but not just at the moment, since I have other things to do.
It had crossed my mind that we could meet up to discuss this issue, but I gave up all hope of that after receiving your email.
I have to say that your dramatic resignation from the 911keeptalking group, in sympathy with Tony Rooke, who had been foul-mouthed and was making wild allegations against us of cowardice, came like a kick in the teeth, after all we had done to support you. I felt that I needed to understand your thinking, and to explain to you mine.
Instead of receiving some sort of reassurance, I became more concerned at the way you were in denial at the very idea that the group could have been infiltrated, when you must be as aware as anyone that even an environmental group which was campaigning in support of Government policy on global warming, was infiltrated by an agent provocateur, Mark Kennedy, and that that case had absolutely nothing to do with the police's role in fighting crime. It was axiomatic in the 9/11 Truth Movement right from the beginning, that we would be infiltrated, and the history of the movement in London has borne that out.
It was incomprehensible to me that anyone in your position could be in denial of the fact that someone who had joined the group, undermined and misrepresented the very objectives of the group, attempted to provoke members to break the law, been foul-mouthed and made allegations of cowardice against those who were not going along with what he was trying to bully them into doing could possibly be an undercover agent. I was even more incredulous when I discovered that Tony Rooke came from a policing family. The defence that Tony Rooke is a "dear friend" cuts no ice. In any case, calling him a "dear friend" suggests that you have known him for a long time.
I appreciate that you may not be afraid of being sued by Bindmans, but that is not the point. By stating that, you are acknowledging that by promoting Charles Seven's statements you possibly could be sued, and that was the point that Mark Windows was legitimately trying to make. Instead of thanking him you condemned him. I think the greater concern is that Brian Gerrish could possibly be sued, and if so, he needs to know that before broadcasting such material. Instead of thanking Mark, and reassuring Brian Gerrish, you condemned Mark, and have now accused him of being a "shill".
Whatever the implications, this behaviour has to raise some concern about you and your own story. Your condemnation of me for not investigating seems not to apply with respect to your own story. It seems that no-one is allowed to doubt anything you say. That is not the behaviour of a Principal Intelligence Analyst with a statistics degree. Nor is it the behaviour of a genuine truth-seeker.
I just need some reason to believe your story, and that it is not a contorted version of what really happened. If you are calling me a "shill" for saying that, then the onus is on you to defend your allegation.
I appreciate that I took the side of Muad Dib and Tony Rooke. I believe neither are shills but I will admit Rookie was not very tactful in expressing himself. I can see how his behaviour antagomised and the three fold resignations one after the other would have created doubts about motives.
My dear friend Rookie has knowm me for just over a year. I call him dear friend because we made the film Offensive together. You can't make a film like that together without becoming good friends. You probably haven't watched it and may be you would not want to. Its horrific but then so was 9/11 and the world sits by and lets it happen.
Bye For Now
I hope we will speak again.
-------- END -----
Interesting that Mr Farrell compares his sacking to the horrors of 9/11.
Stay tuned for updates.