Truthblast Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 (edited) 46 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said: The trouble is that it becomes more difficult to discern who is genuine, or who is a 'bad actor'. What the elite are doing is commonly termed FUD - Fear Uncertainty Disinformation. FUD is very much a numbers game. If they can get enough people to buy into their FUD they win big. If their FUD fails to trick enough people they are in a world of shit 15 years from now. Truthers have a single weapon - the brutal truth. The elite has many weapons - lies, half-truths, spin, distorted statistics, legal action, false flags, advertising, entertainment, propaganda, social engineering, fake science, fake journalists and book authors, infiltrators, disinfo agents, trolls, paid fantasists and liars, and even FAKE RELIGIOUS people. The Book of Revelations warns of GREAT DECEPTIONS as the "End of Days" approaches. It is to be expected that much that we see and hear today is EXPLICITLY DESIGNED TO DECEIVE AND BEFUDDLE. But the more they try to trick us the more we develop a nose that can sniff out their tricks. Edited April 18 by Truthblast 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sock muppet Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 38 minutes ago, Truthblast said: What the elite are doing is commonly termed FUD - Fear Uncertainty Disinformation. FUD is very much a numbers game. If they can get enough people to buy into their FUD they win big. If their FUD fails to trick enough people they are in a world of shit 15 years from now. Truthers have a single weapon - the brutal truth. The elite has many weapons - lies, half-truths, spin, distorted statistics, legal action, false flags, advertising, entertainment, propaganda, social engineering, fake science, fake journalists and book authors, infiltrators, disinfo agents, trolls, paid fantasists and liars, and even FAKE RELIGIOUS people. The Book of Revelations warns of GREAT DECEPTIONS as the "End of Days" approaches. It is to be expected that much that we see and hear today is EXPLICITLY DESIGNED TO DECEIVE AND BEFUDDLE. But the more they try to trick us the more we develop a nose that can sniff out their tricks. Don't forget that all the news feeds on planet stupid are fed directly to super computers that are located as close as is possible to all the trading floors around the world, so you have a monetary incentive as well as a political objective and the computers are programmed to act upon the data that is being passed to them from the news feeds directly where they algorithmically decide on buy or sell triggers, the documentary by Adam Curtis, All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace is an excellent video for those not aware of this fact, https://forum.davidicke.com/index.php?/topic/7147-adam-curtis-bitter-lake-and-hypernormalisation/&do=findComment&comment=391860 I just posted this so i think relevant to the discussion in the Q thread 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sock muppet Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 17 hours ago, Truthblast said: What the elite are doing is commonly termed FUD - Fear Uncertainty Disinformation. FUD is very much a numbers game. If they can get enough people to buy into their FUD they win big. If their FUD fails to trick enough people they are in a world of shit 15 years from now. Truthers have a single weapon - the brutal truth. The elite has many weapons - lies, half-truths, spin, distorted statistics, legal action, false flags, advertising, entertainment, propaganda, social engineering, fake science, fake journalists and book authors, infiltrators, disinfo agents, trolls, paid fantasists and liars, and even FAKE RELIGIOUS people. The Book of Revelations warns of GREAT DECEPTIONS as the "End of Days" approaches. It is to be expected that much that we see and hear today is EXPLICITLY DESIGNED TO DECEIVE AND BEFUDDLE. But the more they try to trick us the more we develop a nose that can sniff out their tricks. Possibly a good time to refresh our memories with the film Network (1976) (I shamelessly stole this write up and added some stuff) In the 1970s, terrorist violence is the stuff of networks nightly news programming and the corporate structure of the UBS (insert any three letter snoooz network here, oh look BBC fits right in, how curious) Television Network is changing. Meanwhile, Howard Beale, the aging UBS news anchor, has lost his once strong ratings share (sprog & Co are shamelessly looking for theirs, ) and so the network fires him. Beale reacts in an unexpected way. We then see how this affects the fortunes of Beale, his coworkers (Max Schumacher and Diana Christensen), and the network. This one has been memory holed from the net, i wonder why, You can still watch it here though, https://archive.org/details/Network1976 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sock muppet Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 Just a reminder of what the Ba'alBullshittingCult is now known for. https://newsletter.martingeddes.com/p/redecorating-the-ministry-of-truth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 2 hours ago, sock muppet said: Possibly a good time to refresh our memories with the film Network (1976) (I shamelessly stole this write up and added some stuff) In the 1970s, terrorist violence is the stuff of networks nightly news programming and the corporate structure of the UBS (insert any three letter snoooz network here, oh look BBC fits right in, how curious) Television Network is changing. Meanwhile, Howard Beale, the aging UBS news anchor, has lost his once strong ratings share (sprog & Co are shamelessly looking for theirs, ) and so the network fires him. Beale reacts in an unexpected way. We then see how this affects the fortunes of Beale, his coworkers (Max Schumacher and Diana Christensen), and the network. This one has been memory holed from the net, i wonder why, You can still watch it here though, https://archive.org/details/Network1976 I love that film. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumpy Owl Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 23 hours ago, lake said: So for my own consideration Grump .... would you say that I was a 'Bad Actor' .... or was I 'Genuine'? (and don't worry anyone I won't be sticking around nor posting ... but I do read and am interested in the thoughts of a very few members here (also I enjoy to 'wind up' one or two other members lol)) I wasn't really inferring anything towards any particular members of this forum, but during my time here I have come across some who I would definitely consider to be 'bad actors' - for the record I don't think you are one. But outside of the forum, there are definitely what would otherwise be known as 'influencers' - people who rise to a level of prominence and become 'well-known', and then there are the 'circles', where the same names appear on each others' podcasts and videos etc. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sock muppet Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 4 hours ago, Morpheus said: I love that film. It does age well and every time i watch it i see even more relevance for this time we are in, at some point in the past it was realised that socio-psychopathic narcissistic shit bags, who were given control of the various forms of information exchange made huge amounts of money for said organisations and other corporations including government because of the lack of morality, possibly with the thought that if it all went horribly wrong they could reverse the decision to have put these types in place before they can set a nuclear annihilation off or some other type of horror to be unleashed on Mankind (hint: convid), the trouble is that whomever devised such a plan are all dead and forgot to reign it all in, annnnnnnnnd here we are, living the dream nightmare, 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnigmaticWorld Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 On 4/18/2023 at 8:37 PM, Macnamara said: yeah but how much of that is seeded in by bad actors to discredit everything else said in this arena? Agreed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR_6dibpDfo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sock muppet Posted April 25 Share Posted April 25 I received an update email from Richard notifying he is appealing for help in the form of donations to help cover the legal costs involved. Richard has very kindly released his book, Manchester - The Night of the Bang, as a free PDF download and is available here, https://cdn1.richplanet.net/pdf/Night_of_the_Bang.pdf The book is still available to buy from here https://www.richplanet.net/store/books?product_id=421 Donations can be made here, https://www.richplanet.net/donate2.php 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sock muppet Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 RDH has them scared and running for the hit pieces to try and smear his name before the up coming trial, the bog paper known to some as the daily mirror of toilet fame and also associated with the name maxwell which is fitting really considering the evil that name is associated with now and forever has printed this garbage. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/manchester-bombing-disaster-troll-asks-30063329 Exclusive: Manchester bombing 'disaster troll' asks fans for lawyer tip to fight civil action case Manchester Arena bombing conspiracy theorist Richard D Hall has asked his fans to recommend a lawyer with survivors taking him to court over his claims the tragedy was faked I cant be bothered to go any further with this trash but thought some of the comments deserve a mention And while i am at it lets not forget this sweet little horrid monster, and i do mean MONSTER So here's why in s/he's own words polly crudson https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/as-covid-restrictions-ease-its-26046616 'As Covid restrictions ease, it's time to get tough on anti-vaxxers' Enough is enough, says Polly Hudson. As Boris Johnson scraps restrictions to save his own skin, we need to convince everyone to get a Covid jab. And that means hitting them where it hurts Further quote: 'those who are afraid, because they’ve genuinely fallen for untrue propaganda – need to be persuaded. The militant, rabid anti-vaxxers will never be persuaded, so they need to be forced.' And just to counter that insane statement above, that i am, uninfected, un-injected, not dead and perfectly healthy even though i tried my best to get sick from the non-existent 'virus' that you scumbuckets were so happy to promote the fear porn of, HOW DARE YOU!!! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malbec Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12263775/Conspiracy-theorist-sued-Manchester-Arena-bombing-victims-claims-attack-staged.html Daily mail hit piece I heard from someone in a local group that the action being taken was on GDPR grounds rather than individuals suing for some kind of defamation... unless that has changed. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemuri Kyoshiro Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 33 minutes ago, Malbec said: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12263775/Conspiracy-theorist-sued-Manchester-Arena-bombing-victims-claims-attack-staged.html Daily mail hit piece I heard from someone in a local group that the action being taken was on GDPR grounds rather than individuals suing for some kind of defamation... unless that has changed. English defamation law puts the burden on the defendant. Richard's accusers don't even have to prove that his statements are false. The law is being used, in my opinion, to censor not only RDH but anyone else who dares to go up against the official narrative, be it a terrorist attack or anything else. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sock muppet Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 54 minutes ago, Malbec said: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12263775/Conspiracy-theorist-sued-Manchester-Arena-bombing-victims-claims-attack-staged.html Daily mail hit piece I heard from someone in a local group that the action being taken was on GDPR grounds rather than individuals suing for some kind of defamation... unless that has changed. 16 minutes ago, Nemuri Kyoshiro said: English defamation law puts the burden on the defendant. Richard's accusers don't even have to prove that his statements are false. The law is being used, in my opinion, to censor not only RDH but anyone else who dares to go up against the official narrative, be it a terrorist attack or anything else. He put out an update on his website and it appears the fund raising has been quite successful and substantial, he has also made all the details available at Andrew Johnson website, the claim is about harassment and GDPR breach for the misuse of 'private information'. Video https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=306&part=1&gen=99 https://www.checktheevidence.com/wordpress/2023/06/15/richard-d-hall-manchester-court-case-documents/ Richard D Hall – Manchester Court Case Document(s) 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumpy Owl Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 23 hours ago, Malbec said: Daily mail hit piece I heard from someone in a local group that the action being taken was on GDPR grounds rather than individuals suing for some kind of defamation... unless that has changed. 22 hours ago, sock muppet said: He put out an update on his website and it appears the fund raising has been quite successful and substantial, he has also made all the details available at Andrew Johnson website, the claim is about harassment and GDPR breach for the misuse of 'private information'. If this case is won because of "GDPR" then it would be unprecedented. GDPR regulations are bullshit and meaningless - I still get unsolicited junk emails every day from companies who have my name and email address on some mailing list they have bought (I even get emails from people offering to sell me lists of contacts - ie bulk mailing lists - which clearly should be illegal under GDPR regulations) Threats to report them to the ICO (Information Commissioners Office) and elsewhere go ignored. There's no established process to report companies in breach of these regulations, and if there is, then it is so long-winded and convoluted that many people - like myself - just don't have the time and energy to follow through. I've read through the court documents that Andrew Johnson posted on his website, and while I'm no lawyer or have any degree of law training, I wouldn't be surprised if the case is thrown out and RDH is found not guilty. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
factJack Posted July 6 Share Posted July 6 On 7/4/2023 at 8:05 PM, Malbec said: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12263775/Conspiracy-theorist-sued-Manchester-Arena-bombing-victims-claims-attack-staged.html Daily mail hit piece I heard from someone in a local group that the action being taken was on GDPR grounds rather than individuals suing for some kind of defamation... unless that has changed. I see the daily heil and their 77th brigade chums have spammed up the comments section with anti hall bias. A deliberate tactic to manipulate the average joe public who usually sit on the fence about matters unti hearing the general consensus. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemuri Kyoshiro Posted July 6 Share Posted July 6 18 minutes ago, factJack said: I see the daily heil and their 77th brigade chums have spammed up the comments section with anti hall bias. A deliberate tactic to manipulate the average joe public who usually sit on the fence about matters unti hearing the general consensus. They did the same with Spivey now known by the public as a 'vile internet troll' as will RDH. The facts that Richard has presented in his film will not matter as this is all about 'feelings' and manufactured outrage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sock muppet Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 On 7/5/2023 at 7:35 PM, Grumpy Owl said: If this case is won because of "GDPR" then it would be unprecedented. GDPR regulations are bullshit and meaningless - I still get unsolicited junk emails every day from companies who have my name and email address on some mailing list they have bought (I even get emails from people offering to sell me lists of contacts - ie bulk mailing lists - which clearly should be illegal under GDPR regulations) Threats to report them to the ICO (Information Commissioners Office) and elsewhere go ignored. There's no established process to report companies in breach of these regulations, and if there is, then it is so long-winded and convoluted that many people - like myself - just don't have the time and energy to follow through. I've read through the court documents that Andrew Johnson posted on his website, and while I'm no lawyer or have any degree of law training, I wouldn't be surprised if the case is thrown out and RDH is found not guilty. GDPR is not meaningless, when you apply to the regulator to have records turned over to you that a company has about you it causes disruption to the company, now times that by a million and the company would cease to function, the fact that you may not get exactly what you want out of it is not the way to view it, but rather the inconvenience it causes when the other party has flouted the rules, eventually it induces respectable behaviour, which is all anyone wanted anyway. If this case was won or thrown out then i suspect that would open up interesting avenues for RDH to pursue further, i am no legal eagle so i am not exactly sure of what happens, but this does feel like a realistic possibility, any thoughts on how much further RDH could take this, it feels like an official seal of approval for the citizen journalist, if it goes in his favour, that could open up many other interesting avenues particularly when it comes to investigating the horrendous collusion that was indulged by the MSM government and corporate entities with respect to convid, it would be nice if RDH could do an interview with Andrew Bridgen, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malbec Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 22 hours ago, factJack said: I see the daily heil and their 77th brigade chums have spammed up the comments section with anti hall bias. A deliberate tactic to manipulate the average joe public who usually sit on the fence about matters unti hearing the general consensus. Yes I thought that, the same 22 comments were the only comments in 24 hours as well. One of which quoted the bbc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonTV Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 They going after him in a similar way they went after Alex jones for pointing out that Sandy Hook was a lie, coincidence. To be honest, if both these events had nothing to hide they wouldn't need to do a court case in my opinion. The fact that they are making such a big deal about in both instances about questioning the event, claiming harassment and similar, shows that they have something to hide. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malbec Posted July 16 Share Posted July 16 (edited) https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=306&part=1&gen=99 Update video above 9 mins from Richard D Hall (apologies if already posted - he uploaded this on 16.6.23), regarding the funding appeal and timelne fofollow the legal proceedings were launched. Then video below is his latest analysis summary on the Manchester incident (1h 22 mins). https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=305&part=1&gen=99 Edited July 16 by Malbec 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northern star Posted July 31 Share Posted July 31 (edited) I wonder why Marianna Spring, head of the new Disinformation Stasi BBC mind-Kontrol centre "Verify", hadnt a single inkling or clue about what was going on with her colleague Huw Edwards. The BBC's most respectable and respected main man. All those years, abusing people. How did she not know? Right under her nose, and she didnt know. Yet she's in charge and paid thousands for looking for misinformation and lies regarding other people for alleged abuse, and prosecuting them. I dont think it bodes well, or says much for her investigative skills, if she couldnt even root out ol' Huw in the same office. Edited August 1 by northern star 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anti Facts Sir Posted July 31 Share Posted July 31 Who? Huw? Who Knew? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemuri Kyoshiro Posted August 2 Share Posted August 2 On 7/31/2023 at 7:39 PM, northern star said: I wonder why Marianna Spring, head of the new Disinformation Stasi BBC mind-Kontrol centre "Verify", hadnt a single inkling or clue about what was going on with her colleague Huw Edwards. The BBC's most respectable and respected main man. All those years, abusing people. How did she not know? Right under her nose, and she didnt know. Yet she's in charge and paid thousands for looking for misinformation and lies regarding other people for alleged abuse, and prosecuting them. I dont think it bodes well, or says much for her investigative skills, if she couldnt even root out ol' Huw in the same office. The BBC was always preachy and loved to wag a finger at the moral shortcomings of the British public. It wasn't known as 'Aunty' for nothing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumpy Owl Posted August 13 Share Posted August 13 Quote You’re being taken to court over this? If people want to read the claim against me, they can follow this link, go and read the documents – the claim and defence, and form your own opinion. I’m not being sued for defamation, but harassment and breach of GDPR rules. This is not ‘in-person’ harassment. They are saying the opinions in my book amount to harassment! My barrister writes: ‘The claims are denied and make very little reference to or reliance on any conduct or specific statements of opinion by the defendant made about either of the claimants. Instead, the claimants purport to bring a claim of harassment which is based almost entirely on general observations, other statements and published opinion of the journalist, about an alleged incident at Manchester Arena, and base most of their claim on what he believes to be untrue about the narrative which has been presented to the general public. In summary, they are seeking to bring a claim against the defendant for being an independent broadcaster who has advanced opinions which are different to the mainstream media’s, all under the guise of harassment against them personally. This amounts to censorship, is an abuse of process and should be struck out.’ The word ‘opinion’ appears in my book over 100 times, and there is a message at the front which makes it clear I’m expressing opinions throughout the book. The intention of this legal action is to get an injunction against me and bankrupt me, and if that were to happen, it would have serious ramifications for my freedom of speech, and everyone’s. They’re trying to shut me down. from: https://www.richplanet.net/article.php 'Opinions' are now 'harassment' it would seem. And 'GDPR rules' shouldn't apply as the persons in question have already been named by the mainstream media. I think this case will ultimately be thrown out, but it will have further ramifications as 'the powers that be' seek to nullify all kinds of "wrongthink". Opinions are not facts. There is nothing wrong with having a contrary or different opinion, it is perfectly healthy. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
factJack Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 I only stumbled on something similar the other day and i thought about Richard. I was reading the wiki for the disappearance of suzie lamploo, one of these private investigators wrote a book on her disappearance and alleged she was a prostitute. The family were of course upset and sued the author. He had to put a disclaimer in his book. Surely this is all we can expect to happen to Hall? Quote h**s://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Suzy_Lamplugh The Lamplugh family brought legal action and forced Stephen to add a disclaimer to the book stating that the family did not recognise or accept his portrayal of Lamplugh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.8081a54a3b74a5d1823dfac966666137.jpg)
.jpg.594f0ef23288ec5ab04539b2f8a8dbd4.jpg)
Recommended Posts
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.