29 votes

The BBC in the Dock for Manipulating Evidence and Providing Biased Coverage of the September 11, 2001 Attacks

"9/11 Truth is fundamental in disarming “the war on terrorism” ...

And the BBC through its biased reporting, not to mention the manipulation of photographic evidence, has acted as an instrument of war propaganda. It is complicit in war crimes.

As a continuation of this process with the BBC, documentary film maker Tony Rooke has decided to take a personal stand on this issue. People in the United Kingdom are required to pay an annual TV licence fee which is used to fund BBC’s operations. Tony has refused to pay his TV licence fee on the basis of specific anti-terrorism legislation.

Section 15 of the UK Terrorism Act 2000, Article 3, states that it is offence to provide funds if there is a reasonable cause to suspect that those funds may be used for the purposes of terrorism. Tony’s claim is that BBC has withheld scientific evidence which demonstrates that the official version of the events of 9/11 is not possible and that BBC has actively attempted to discredit those people attempting to bring this evidence to the public. According to Rooke, by doing this, BBC is supporting a cover-up of the true events of 9/11 and is therefore potentially supporting those terrorist elements who were involved in certain aspects of 9/11 who have not yet been identified and held to account."
http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001Gf9l2rqtTz1AnPOYivJg2bitrMds1...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The irony,

A Brit has enough standing to get this heard in court ,,,,,

Yeah, and the Supreme Court just tossed a WIDOW to the street.

I wonder if Glenn feels any shame over that?

Although, this guy did not TAKE the case to court, he refused to pay a tax, they DRAGGED him to court. They may not like what they dragged in, once it starts to snarl and bite.

Love or fear? Chose again with every breath.

Indeed.

Indeed.