Jump to content

Richard D Hall


alexa

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, xpwales said:

Iain Davies has published a new article on Richard D. Hall / Manchester - 3rd March 2024...

"The Manchester Arena False Flag"

https://off-guardian.org/2024/03/07/the-manchester-arena-false-flag/

 

 

Great article by Iain Davies, this part is the most telling bit of it and gives you an idea where they want this to lead:

 

Quote

In an interview aired on ITV’s Good Morning Britain (GMB), Martin Hibbert spoke about his relationship with Andy Burnham, the mayor of Manchester. Mr Hibbert stated that if he wins the case against Hall, he, Burnham and his legal team are seeking to use the ruling to push for the creation of a new criminal offence.

Hibbert and his supporters want to make it illegal to question any reported victim account of an alleged terrorist attack. If enacted, it will ensure that no investigative journalist can ever question State narratives about terror events. Once on the statute books, it is highly likely that the offence will be extended to prohibit the questioning of other State narratives, wherever it is claimed someone was harmed. Murder, for example.

 

Basically the Establishment can 'establish' any given narrative, and it will be illegal for anyone to question it, or indeed investigate it. Or even express a contrary opinion.

 

Yeah, I know much of the 'mainstream media' journalists don't really do much investigating as such, but this would really put an end to a lot of independent investigative journalism.

 

Mainstream media is already just parroting press releases, 'official announcements' and tweets without any questioning or deeper analysis.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Grumpy Owl said:

Basically the Establishment can 'establish' any given narrative, and it will be illegal for anyone to question it, or indeed investigate it. Or even express a contrary opinion.

 

Yeah, I know much of the 'mainstream media' journalists don't really do much investigating as such, but this would really put an end to a lot of independent investigative journalism.

 

Mainstream media is already just parroting press releases, 'official announcements' and tweets without any questioning or deeper analysis.

I would imaging that there are many who can see through false flag events and many who are just starting to see it (just like COVID), if these laws are enacted then with a bit of luck the Establishment could become complacent and stage too many false flags which exhibit more obvious contradictions and inconsistencies in the narrative, hopefully leading to a larger awaking.

Wishful thinking but it could be possible.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/28/2024 at 7:24 AM, xpwales said:

Observe the pre-scripted response from the Deceptibot (Garraway) when Martin mentions Richard Hall's name at 10mins in...

kate-garraway-response.jpg.e8b4bd37cbe36230ae0d25b1ba53f530.jpg

 

🤣

Whoever invented the term "Deceptibot" is brilliant!  Haha, I'm gonna use it every chance I get.

Thanks!

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, novymir said:

Whoever invented the term "Deceptibot" is brilliant!  Haha, I'm gonna use it every chance I get.

Thanks!

It was copied from the Transformers Movie - "Decepticons", then changed to add a "press enter" (robotic) personality to it.  😀

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Related...

 

Concerning false flags and staged hoaxes. Especially claimed "Islamist" ones.

 

There was an article posted at D.I.'s "news" site about a graveyard being vandalized with graffiti in France with "Islamic" taunts. That was in the Daily Mail.

 

I highly doubt it was muslims, unless they were being handled by a non-muslim shadow group. I'd call it a minor false-flag to keep "the enemy" within the minds of the population. But it's a secondary enemy, the result of actions of the primary enemy. Who brought them in?

 

They're obviously using the influx of "muslims/Arabs" as a weapon within.

 

Who benefits?

 

Who benefits from riots, chaos, civil war, and "terrorism" in Western societies? Iran, etc,etc? Get fvcking serious.

 

 

Musk was talking about how the illegals coming in is "laying the groundwork for something worse than 9-11".

 

Predictive programming. 

Turn up the chaos and insanity, and destruction, and then offer the predetermined "remedy".

 

Ordo-Ab-Chao.

 

They've (the scum that owns and operates the governments of the world) got all these potential patsies and possible candidates for manipulation available at their disposal within the Western(formerly known as "Christendom") countries. 

 

And as has been said before, the only time they tell the truth is by accident or to cover for a bigger lie.

 

This is a confession of a False Flag:

 

At 1:08 he says "......it's easy to put a truck bomb, as we did..[...err, oops...] was done, in London...".

 

 

 

 

"STAY SAFE" ?

Unbelievable Diabolicism.

 

Only in a Dream of Deceit. Inversion Land.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lord_of_the_flies_book_.jpeg

 

 

 

handrubber.gif

Edited by novymir
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Richard D Hall has provided an update about his legal case on his site today.

 

https://www.richplanet.net/legal.php

 

Prior to the latest update, a case management hearing took place on 13th March 2024 whereby a costs order was made against RDH for a sizeable sum of £21,000 plus VAT. The costs were incurred on the basis that, after the previous hearing of 29th January 2024, RDH lost the initial part of the case where it was considered whether he could present his evidence which he feels refutes the official narrative of the Manchester Bombing. The judge, Master Davison, concluded there was no reasonable prospect of success that RDH's evidence could overturn the findings of the public inquiry and the criminal conviction of Salman Abedi's brother Hashem Abedi as an accomplice to the crime.

 

Whilst RDH has not lost the entire case (it has yet to be decided at a trial hearing if he harassed the Hibberts, has breached GDPR and the Data Protection Act), he feels that it is paramount to his defence that he is able to present his investigation into the Manchester Bombing which he states was conducted in order to prevent or detect crime after he was approached by a whistleblower in July 2017.

 

At the case management hearing, Master Davison declined permission to appeal but said that RDH could raise this further with a more senior High Court judge. RDH submitted his appeal request accordingly but another judge, Mrs Justice Steyn, has also turned it down. RDH states on his website that he has now "applied for a Hearing at the High Court to apply to renew my Appeal, and a Hearing has been granted which should take place at the end of May 2024".

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

RDH's interview with The Light has now been published - he is not happy and now concludes it is a limited hangout. RDH has this to say about it on his Telegram channel (I have kept typos in).

 

Quote

I have just read the recent piece about me in the Light Newspaper

 

No mention of the title of my book or films.

 

No mention of the name of my website Richplanet TV.

 

No link to how to find the films online.

 

No link to the court hearing transrcirpt.

 

https://cdn1.richplanet.net/pdf/transcript1.pdf

 

No mention of my appeal or the details of the appeal.

 

https://cdn1.richplanet.net/pdf/Appeal1.pdf

 

The only links provided were to a MSM article and a link to the words of the judge.

 

Pretty woeful.  Without any question this is limited hangout.

 

Page 5 ...
https://thelightpaper.co.uk/assets/pdf/Light-44-Apr-24-Web-Final.pdf

 

image.png.dec79a1108ac506efa2db73f1987d18b.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Not sure if this is really relevant to the post but it's still relating to Richard D Hall (maybe I should make a new thread), but as Richard has made his home "off grid" where he no longer uses a utlity company, I wonder, how is he able to pay for things like car insurance and tax on his car/s and other things which will require some kind of payment via their bank account?. How is he able to do these things when he says he doesn't have a bank account?. Or is he paying by cash via postal order at the post office?. From what he said in a show about advising people to take their money out of the bank (and good luck with that one I say), I'm assuming he no longer keeps his money in a bank. So how does he get around paying for certain things without a debit payment or cheque payment?. And how is he not harrased by TV licensing goons when he just throws his TV license letters in the bin?. The reason why most people pay it (which tbf is only 12 quid a month) is because they don't want to knocks at the door being thretend with a fine.

 

I use physical money everytime I go shopping or buy things from a shop, but there are some things which need to pay via bank account via debit card or direct debit, and there is no way around this as far as I'm aware. I had to pay for a family funeral recently and I decided to pay half of it with cash, and I looked a right divvy handing over nearly 2 grand in notes and my partner felt sorry for the poor lady having to count it all lol. I then decided to pay the rest off with my card because it would've taken me several trips to the cash machine to draw it all out, and the bank would've asked what I wanted to draw the money out for. The main reason why people keep their money in a bank account is because of interest. I would love to take my money out the bank, but sadly that's not an option because I often to pay for things online for my kids for things I can't pay in the shops. And how does Richard afford to pay for things when he doesn't have a regular full time job?. He has a son I beleive, so how does he afford clothes, toys etc?. Sellings Richplanet marchandise can't be paying for that.

Edited by Occulus5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Occulus5 said:

Not sure if this is really relevant to the post but it's still relating to Richard D Hall (maybe I should make a new thread), but as Richard has made his home "off grid" where he no longer uses a utlity company, I wonder, how is he able to pay for things like car insurance and tax on his car/s and other things which will require some kind of payment via their bank account?. How is he able to do these things when he says he doesn't have a bank account?. Or is he paying by cash via postal order at the post office?. From what he said in a show about advising people to take their money out of the bank (and good luck with that one I say), I'm assuming he no longer keeps his money in a bank. So how does he get around paying for certain things without a debit payment or cheque payment?.

 

I cannot speak for Richard D Hall's personal finances and nobody else presumably can either aside from the man himself. However, he definitely has at least one bank account because he is requesting bank transfers direct to a Barclays account in his name for donations towards his legal case.

 

https://www.richplanet.net/donatelegal.php

 

6 hours ago, Occulus5 said:

And how is he not harrased by TV licensing goons when he just throws his TV license letters in the bin?. The reason why most people pay it (which tbf is only 12 quid a month) is because they don't want to knocks at the door being thretend with a fine.

 

I have found it easy enough to avoid harassment from TV Licensing.

 

I don't watch television and complete a 'No Licence Needed' declaration - they leave me alone for two years and then send me a form to fill to confirm (again) that I do not need a licence. Black Belt Barrister seems to suggest that you don't even necessarily need to complete the declaration but it does seem to stop the harassment so I prefer to do so for a quiet life. Granted, when I first stopped my payments and completed the declaration, there were initially some threatening letters in bold red - but, when I complained formally in writing, they pretty quickly apologised and claimed there had been some sort of admin error (the wrong button had been pressed or something...).

 

If they were to turn up, I would probably invite them in and show them my set up and that I genuinely don't watch TV. I would ask to film them before letting them in though so that they don't pull any funny business.

 

6 hours ago, Occulus5 said:

And how does Richard afford to pay for things when he doesn't have a regular full time job?. He has a son I beleive, so how does he afford clothes, toys etc?. Sellings Richplanet marchandise can't be paying for that.

 

RDH made a video during the Scamdemic explaining about how he came to buy his house in Wales on the cheap, the work he has done on it to provide off grid capabilities and how he has achieved paying off the mortgage he had (which was only £28,000). RDH supplemented his meagre self employed earnings of £7,500 to £10,000 per year with Working Tax Credit and describes himself as a "miser". It helps being able to do the improvements oneself as RDH can and he also inherited from his late mother.

 

https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=289&part=1&gen=99

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for info about the TV license Yes I guess it's best to notify them in writing stating I don't have a TV or watch rather than just ignore letters and go through the ordeal of harassing knocks at the door which I don't want. I have seen some of Black Belt Barrister's videos and "Chilli Con Carne" or whatever he calls himself, but I don't trust them. These youtube channels seem to have very large subs and viewers.

 

As for RDH, but I was under the impression he doesn't have any bank account at all, because in one of his shows a few years ago when he was talking about his off grid home he advised people to take their money out of the bank, so I just thought he no longer has a bank account. How would anyone be able to gain employment working for a company without a bank account? unless they were paying you cash in hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Occulus5 said:

Thanks for info about the TV license Yes I guess it's best to notify them in writing stating I don't have a TV or watch rather than just ignore letters and go through the ordeal of harassing knocks at the door which I don't want. I have seen some of Black Belt Barrister's videos and "Chilli Con Carne" or whatever he calls himself, but I don't trust them. These youtube channels seem to have very large subs and viewers.

 

I don't entirely trust Black Belt Barrister either because he is chummy with Charlie Veitch who is widely considered an agent in conspiracy circles.

 

Having said that, I think Black Belt Barrister's legal content, given that he is registered as a barrister and regulated by the Bar Standards Board, can be trusted as representative of the mainstream view of the law and our legal system. He does provide some useful tips on some areas such as TV Licensing and parking penalties. And, unpopular as this may be within the alternative sphere, he is correct about the nonsense put out by the FotL / Sovereign Citizens / "common law" cultists etc even if he gets a bad rap from them including the likes of Richard Vobes.

 

13 hours ago, Occulus5 said:

As for RDH, but I was under the impression he doesn't have any bank account at all, because in one of his shows a few years ago when he was talking about his off grid home he advised people to take their money out of the bank, so I just thought he no longer has a bank account. How would anyone be able to gain employment working for a company without a bank account? unless they were paying you cash in hand.

 

RDH doesn't work for a company as far as I am aware but rather works for himself. I assume he must still need a bank account in order to receive payment from the sales he makes - maybe he withdraws it afterwards at intervals.

 

Aside from what RDH has said publicly, I am not sure how anyone other than RDH can really answer these questions about his finances other than with a considerable dose of speculation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Occulus5 said:

Thanks for info about the TV license Yes I guess it's best to notify them in writing stating I don't have a TV or watch rather than just ignore letters and go through the ordeal of harassing knocks at the door which I don't want. I have seen some of Black Belt Barrister's videos and "Chilli Con Carne" or whatever he calls himself, but I don't trust them. These youtube channels seem to have very large subs and viewers.

 

As for RDH, but I was under the impression he doesn't have any bank account at all, because in one of his shows a few years ago when he was talking about his off grid home he advised people to take their money out of the bank, so I just thought he no longer has a bank account. How would anyone be able to gain employment working for a company without a bank account? unless they were paying you cash in hand.

 

On the contrary the best way of interacting with the pedo-*bbc is to NOT interact with them.

 

(*bbc - sponsored by pfizer)

 

Ignore their poxy junkmail,just as they ignored the Anti-Lockdown protests.

 

Chilli Jon Carne has broken their fear-spell on many,including me and as a show of appreciation I often run a vid of his to let the adverts play out (volume down and busy elsewhere) till they finish.

 

I despise tv in 2024 and wouldn't watch it if you paid me;give me classic uncensored sitcoms on dvd or memorycard.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/14/2024 at 8:37 PM, Mitochondrial Eve said:

I have found it easy enough to avoid harassment from TV Licensing.

 

I don't watch television and complete a 'No Licence Needed' declaration - they leave me alone for two years and then send me a form to fill to confirm (again) that I do not need a licence. Black Belt Barrister seems to suggest that you don't even necessarily need to complete the declaration but it does seem to stop the harassment so I prefer to do so for a quiet life. Granted, when I first stopped my payments and completed the declaration, there were initially some threatening letters in bold red - but, when I complained formally in writing, they pretty quickly apologised and claimed there had been some sort of admin error (the wrong button had been pressed or something...).

 

If they were to turn up, I would probably invite them in and show them my set up and that I genuinely don't watch TV. I would ask to film them before letting them in though so that they don't pull any funny business.

 

I cancelled my TV licence in March 2020. I too no longer watch any broadcast television, and I do not use BBC's iPlayer to watch any live broadcasts.

 

Yes, it is true that you are expected to complete a 'No Licence Needed' declaration every two years, and just recently I had my second one, which I submitted online.

 

In the last four years, I have never received any 'threatening' letters, nor have I had anyone knocking on my door unannounced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/16/2024 at 8:46 PM, Grumpy Owl said:

 

I cancelled my TV licence in March 2020. I too no longer watch any broadcast television, and I do not use BBC's iPlayer to watch any live broadcasts.

 

Yes, it is true that you are expected to complete a 'No Licence Needed' declaration every two years, and just recently I had my second one, which I submitted online.

 

In the last four years, I have never received any 'threatening' letters, nor have I had anyone knocking on my door unannounced.

I'm confused. According to some people, the license is just for watching BBC broadcasts, but according to their website they state:

"The law says you need to be covered by a TV Licence to:

  • watch or record TV on any channel - via any TV service (e.g. Sky, Virgin, BT, Freeview, Freesat)
  • watch TV live on any streaming service (e.g. ITVX, Channel 4, YouTube, Amazon Prime Video, Now TV, Sky Go)
  • watch BBC iPlayer*.

On any device."

 

So basically I can't watch Netflix, Amazon Prime etc on my tablet or a PC unless I have a TV license?

Edited by Occulus5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Occulus5 said:

So basically I can't watch Netflix, Amazon Prime etc on my tablet or a PC unless I have a TV license?

 

You do not need a TV licence unless you are using those services to stream TV channels as they are broadcasting, BBC, ITV, C4 etc etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said:

 

You do not need a TV licence unless you are using those services to stream TV channels as they are broadcasting, BBC, ITV, C4 etc etc.

Si it's just for TV channels not watching streaming sites like Netfix or Amazon Prime etc?.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...