Same thing happened to Alex Jones, who was not allowed by the "judge" ( read Presidium ) to cross-examine the so-called witnesses who were military stooges moved into Sandy Hook six months before the false flag. Evidence shows the Sandy Hook, Connecticut school was shut down two years earlier due to mold, and the shooting never happened. Several books on the event prove it. He was forced to pay one billion and apologize to the fake parents, who just coincidentally appeared at Obama's little soiree at the White House later on laughing gleefully in front of the presser, before assuming faces of sorrow over the loss of their never-having-existed dead children. Obama in the background having a good old time grinning at the foolery. I recall Michel Chossudovsky saying right after 9/11 that "all the institutions have been criminalized". So it happens now on a regular basis if you tell the truth about the lies of the state and their highly-paid stooges and liars.
My guess is that infowars is still going because that whole charade was an op within an op. Infowars is cointel. No doubt. They may bring credible people on to “interview” at times, and if memory serves me right, Jones had a guest on that claimed it was a hoax, or he “entertained” the idea that it was a hoax for a minute in time, (I’d have to go back and find the segment to jog my memory) and then he was paraded as being “persecuted” with a lawsuit and “censoring” him by banning his twitter account for a time. The aim seems to have been to set a precedence about not questioning individuals connected to mass casualty events or to question the event itself. It sends a message of financial ruin if you dare attempt to.
Yes, it was interesting that no sooner had the verdict been announced against Alex Jones than Robert Malone tried suing the Breggins for $25 million (his case got thrown out) and a few months later proceedings began against Hall. Similar developments can be traced in Germany with respect to Michael Ballweg, CJ Hopkins, and Reiner Fuellmich. There evidently came a moment in 2022 when it was decided to use lawfare to shut down critical discussion and begin the process of criminalising dissent, known from Nazi Germany (see pp. 14-15 of my Wall Street book).
Thank you for this write up David. I had only heard about the “Ariana Grande concert bombing” when it was a headline in my area the following day. I didn’t follow it or look into it any further. But now with this ruling against Hall and your intro write-up, I became curious and watched his documentary. Very interesting. Looking forward to the subsequent write-ups.
Yes, I, too, would not have looked into it were it not for Hall. It is the spreading of awareness that the authorities are trying, in vain, to put a lid on.
Being an American I read little about the Manchester arena incident, other than what official news sources reported. I only noted it in passing to begin with. Until reading this. My curiosity became aroused as you described this being a false flag incident and that the whole thing has been made about the reporter harassing 2 people who complained about something so obscure within his reporting on the incident. Started sounding exactly like what happened to Alex Jones here in US regarding his reporting on the Sandy Hook "school shooting". I'll keep reading the series now. I want to know who these people really are. And why this "incident" occurred. Love your work anyway.
Many people in the US have contacted me pointing out the similarities with Sandy Hook. Having not looked into Sandy Hook myself, I cannot vouch for the veracity of that comparison.
But what I do know is that the legal proceedings against Hall are an absolute travesty.
Through his 'Rich Planet' series with many guest speakers, and his lecture tours, Richard D. Hall has a distinguished track record of alerting us to various criminal deceptions attempted by our rulers. His work on the Manchester Arena 'bombing' seems to have touched a raw nerve as to what our Establishment's string-pullers will tolerate now, as their net is pulling in tighter round what we are permitted to think critically about. It was Richard and guests' coverage of 7/7 (in particular the Peter Power video where Power claimed 'the hairs on the back of his neck' stood up when he realised that the tube train and bus explosions coincided exactly with a drill being carried out that day) which made me first start questioning the previously unthinkable - that governments would connive in maiming and murdering members of the public. He and Andrew Johnson similarly raised awareness of Dr Judy Wood's research and (what has been aptly described as) her magnum opus - 'Where did the Towers Go'. Not only that, but contributing their own ideas and written work as supporting evidence:
In one of the Substack discussions on Richard's Manchester 'bombing' investigation and his subsequent charade of a trial, someone said that Martin Hibbert's TV interviews (where he aired his fantastical account of his and his daughter eve's injuries) were probably what inspired him to look into these alleged 'bombing victims' further. To chase up someone like Hibbert (well misspelt Fibbert) for a factual account of what actually caused their injuries would have been futile, hence an unsuccessful attempt to speak to Eve's mother Sarah Gillbard. Richard was merely doing what he had he had always done, politely and respectfully pursuing the truth of events wherever it led, regardless of potential hostile reactions from those with something to hide. Without Investigative Journalists of his calibre, whose dogged determination to do the leg-work and compilation of evidence necessary, all we are left with is whatever the government and their handlers/lackeys want us to believe.
I am thankful to all such genuine truth seekers, and those who uphold them in the face of official attempts to destroy their credibility and livelihoods. Professor Hughes deserves much gratitude, in his quest this week to 'get to the bottom' of a legal travesty. As Iain Davis termed his own investigation, 'There is no justice, just us'.
Whatever one thinks about Richard D. Hall, there is no doubt in my mind that he has spent years honestly, and in an evidence-based manner, trying to get to the bottom of some very important topics that no other investigative journalist dares touch. Moreover, he has done so on a shoe-string budget and with a sense of humour.
For this, the public owes him its deepest respect and gratitude, not least because his work has involved exposing state crime and deception perpetrated against the public for oppressive ends.
Despite the recent Judgment against him, I think Hall's reputation will now soar among those paying attention. And because his case was made high profile by taking him to the High Court of Justice, more and more people have heard of him.
Like so many issues in society at present, it feels as though a dam is about to burst and the trust will inexorably flood out. The lawfare against Hall looks like an act of desperation to me, trying to patch up holes in the dam before the whole thing collapses.
To me, one of the strangest aspects of Richard's trial was the limited coverage his case had with all the "alt media" - truth tellers out in the social media sphere.... It was dead quiet...
It kinda reminds me of what happened to Dr Wood in 2011 / 2012 when she published her 9/11 book: Where did the towers go? And it also plays into your (Prof Hughes) paper of 2020, calling out academia on the events of 9/11...
I would so love it if you could ask very challenging questions to the research director at the International Center for 9/11 Justice (suppression) and co-director of the Organisation for Propaganda Studies, Piers Robinson why he is a propaganda spreader on Wednesday, November 27, at 9:00 AM EST - https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81835966798?pwd=TWpVK0tnWVovZ1hCeXRUOThHUEY5QT09#success
Richard was one of the first to open my eyes to nanotech in jabs. Has he given up on that? I guess he's got too much on his plate now. Can we do anything to help him?
I believe Miri A.F. has stated that she believes Richard Hall is part of the Manchester bombing psychological operation. The deception by the deep state can be very hard to perceive. I find myself trusting almost nothing.
I don't understand how people "know" with such certainty that the Sandy Hook shooting did not happen or why Americans look to Alec Jones for truth telling.
Same thing happened to Alex Jones, who was not allowed by the "judge" ( read Presidium ) to cross-examine the so-called witnesses who were military stooges moved into Sandy Hook six months before the false flag. Evidence shows the Sandy Hook, Connecticut school was shut down two years earlier due to mold, and the shooting never happened. Several books on the event prove it. He was forced to pay one billion and apologize to the fake parents, who just coincidentally appeared at Obama's little soiree at the White House later on laughing gleefully in front of the presser, before assuming faces of sorrow over the loss of their never-having-existed dead children. Obama in the background having a good old time grinning at the foolery. I recall Michel Chossudovsky saying right after 9/11 that "all the institutions have been criminalized". So it happens now on a regular basis if you tell the truth about the lies of the state and their highly-paid stooges and liars.
I haven't looked into Sandy Hook, but one thing I don't understand is how Infowars is still going if Jones was forced to pay a billion dollars?
My guess is that infowars is still going because that whole charade was an op within an op. Infowars is cointel. No doubt. They may bring credible people on to “interview” at times, and if memory serves me right, Jones had a guest on that claimed it was a hoax, or he “entertained” the idea that it was a hoax for a minute in time, (I’d have to go back and find the segment to jog my memory) and then he was paraded as being “persecuted” with a lawsuit and “censoring” him by banning his twitter account for a time. The aim seems to have been to set a precedence about not questioning individuals connected to mass casualty events or to question the event itself. It sends a message of financial ruin if you dare attempt to.
Yes, it was interesting that no sooner had the verdict been announced against Alex Jones than Robert Malone tried suing the Breggins for $25 million (his case got thrown out) and a few months later proceedings began against Hall. Similar developments can be traced in Germany with respect to Michael Ballweg, CJ Hopkins, and Reiner Fuellmich. There evidently came a moment in 2022 when it was decided to use lawfare to shut down critical discussion and begin the process of criminalising dissent, known from Nazi Germany (see pp. 14-15 of my Wall Street book).
The trial of Alex Jones seems fake.
Thank you for this write up David. I had only heard about the “Ariana Grande concert bombing” when it was a headline in my area the following day. I didn’t follow it or look into it any further. But now with this ruling against Hall and your intro write-up, I became curious and watched his documentary. Very interesting. Looking forward to the subsequent write-ups.
Yes, I, too, would not have looked into it were it not for Hall. It is the spreading of awareness that the authorities are trying, in vain, to put a lid on.
Being an American I read little about the Manchester arena incident, other than what official news sources reported. I only noted it in passing to begin with. Until reading this. My curiosity became aroused as you described this being a false flag incident and that the whole thing has been made about the reporter harassing 2 people who complained about something so obscure within his reporting on the incident. Started sounding exactly like what happened to Alex Jones here in US regarding his reporting on the Sandy Hook "school shooting". I'll keep reading the series now. I want to know who these people really are. And why this "incident" occurred. Love your work anyway.
Thanks, Alison.
To be honest, the same would have been true for people in the UK, were it not for Hall's investigative journalism.
No one (other than UK Critical Thinker, whose work inspired Hall, see https://odysee.com/@avprogrammering:0/On-the-face-of-it-Manchester-by-UK-Critical-Thinker:8) would have thought to question the state's version of events.
Many people in the US have contacted me pointing out the similarities with Sandy Hook. Having not looked into Sandy Hook myself, I cannot vouch for the veracity of that comparison.
But what I do know is that the legal proceedings against Hall are an absolute travesty.
Through his 'Rich Planet' series with many guest speakers, and his lecture tours, Richard D. Hall has a distinguished track record of alerting us to various criminal deceptions attempted by our rulers. His work on the Manchester Arena 'bombing' seems to have touched a raw nerve as to what our Establishment's string-pullers will tolerate now, as their net is pulling in tighter round what we are permitted to think critically about. It was Richard and guests' coverage of 7/7 (in particular the Peter Power video where Power claimed 'the hairs on the back of his neck' stood up when he realised that the tube train and bus explosions coincided exactly with a drill being carried out that day) which made me first start questioning the previously unthinkable - that governments would connive in maiming and murdering members of the public. He and Andrew Johnson similarly raised awareness of Dr Judy Wood's research and (what has been aptly described as) her magnum opus - 'Where did the Towers Go'. Not only that, but contributing their own ideas and written work as supporting evidence:
https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=129&part=1&gen=99
https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=291&part=1&gen=99
https://www.checktheevidence.com/wordpress/2009/06/15/9-11-finding-the-truth-free-download-book/
https://www.checktheevidence.com/wordpress/2017/11/20/9-11-holding-the-truth/
In one of the Substack discussions on Richard's Manchester 'bombing' investigation and his subsequent charade of a trial, someone said that Martin Hibbert's TV interviews (where he aired his fantastical account of his and his daughter eve's injuries) were probably what inspired him to look into these alleged 'bombing victims' further. To chase up someone like Hibbert (well misspelt Fibbert) for a factual account of what actually caused their injuries would have been futile, hence an unsuccessful attempt to speak to Eve's mother Sarah Gillbard. Richard was merely doing what he had he had always done, politely and respectfully pursuing the truth of events wherever it led, regardless of potential hostile reactions from those with something to hide. Without Investigative Journalists of his calibre, whose dogged determination to do the leg-work and compilation of evidence necessary, all we are left with is whatever the government and their handlers/lackeys want us to believe.
I am thankful to all such genuine truth seekers, and those who uphold them in the face of official attempts to destroy their credibility and livelihoods. Professor Hughes deserves much gratitude, in his quest this week to 'get to the bottom' of a legal travesty. As Iain Davis termed his own investigation, 'There is no justice, just us'.
Thanks, Teresa.
Whatever one thinks about Richard D. Hall, there is no doubt in my mind that he has spent years honestly, and in an evidence-based manner, trying to get to the bottom of some very important topics that no other investigative journalist dares touch. Moreover, he has done so on a shoe-string budget and with a sense of humour.
For this, the public owes him its deepest respect and gratitude, not least because his work has involved exposing state crime and deception perpetrated against the public for oppressive ends.
Despite the recent Judgment against him, I think Hall's reputation will now soar among those paying attention. And because his case was made high profile by taking him to the High Court of Justice, more and more people have heard of him.
Like so many issues in society at present, it feels as though a dam is about to burst and the trust will inexorably flood out. The lawfare against Hall looks like an act of desperation to me, trying to patch up holes in the dam before the whole thing collapses.
To me, one of the strangest aspects of Richard's trial was the limited coverage his case had with all the "alt media" - truth tellers out in the social media sphere.... It was dead quiet...
It kinda reminds me of what happened to Dr Wood in 2011 / 2012 when she published her 9/11 book: Where did the towers go? And it also plays into your (Prof Hughes) paper of 2020, calling out academia on the events of 9/11...
I would so love it if you could ask very challenging questions to the research director at the International Center for 9/11 Justice (suppression) and co-director of the Organisation for Propaganda Studies, Piers Robinson why he is a propaganda spreader on Wednesday, November 27, at 9:00 AM EST - https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81835966798?pwd=TWpVK0tnWVovZ1hCeXRUOThHUEY5QT09#success
I'll get into the lack of support for Hall in the "alt media" towards the end of the series.
I plan to spend the rest of this week finishing up that series.
I have just read a Substack piece that proposes the idea that Richard Hall is a government agent.
Who wrote it, as it's most probably someone with very a suspect background...
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/the-easy-way-to-introduce-a-really
Petra needs to lay off the weed.
She believes no one died on 9/11 and the building were empty.
Serious mental issues with that one, my dear….
This too: https://rumble.com/v5qwrwn-miri-af.html?e9s=src_v1_ucp
I will discuss Miri Ann Finch's position briefly towards the end of this series.
Richard was one of the first to open my eyes to nanotech in jabs. Has he given up on that? I guess he's got too much on his plate now. Can we do anything to help him?
He doesn't shy away from anything, provided it is evidence-based.
We can donate to his legal fund (https://www.richplanet.net/donatelegal.php) and write in support of him.
David,
I believe Miri A.F. has stated that she believes Richard Hall is part of the Manchester bombing psychological operation. The deception by the deep state can be very hard to perceive. I find myself trusting almost nothing.
I will deal with Miri's position in Part 9 of this series.
I don't understand how people "know" with such certainty that the Sandy Hook shooting did not happen or why Americans look to Alec Jones for truth telling.