Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Scorpius

Tony Rooke v BBC - 9/11 Cover Up

42 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Interesting article and video, in case this hasn't been posted.

Terror on the Tube – Feb 26, 2013

I believe the BBC, who are directly funded by the licence fee, are furthering the purposes of terrorism and I have incontrovertible evidence to this effect. I do not use this word lightly given where I am’ Tony Rooke

The Magistrate’s decision has to be seen in the context of Tony Rooke amassing a team of witnesses who had submitted witness statements and evidence to the court prior to yesterday’s hearing. These witnesses came from a variety of backgrounds and composed of the following:

· Ian Henshall – Reinvestigate 9/11 and author

· Peter Drew – activist against BBC broadcasting standards

· Ray Savage – former Police Officer with experience in Counter Terrorism and Regional Intelligence Units

· Niels Harrit – Scientist from Copenhagen

· Adrian Mallett – Firefighter and Engineer

· Tony Farrell – former Principal Intelligence Analyst for South Yorkshire Police

A British 911 court Hearing (by NK)

Tony used
in his defence. Remember her? On 9/11, she was the BBC’s pre-cognitive reporter in New York. In the words of the Daily Mail,
” the BBC allegedly reported that World Trade Centre 7 had fallen 20 minutes before it did.”

Advance News from the BBC
The BBC reported that World Trade Centre building 7 had collapsed, at 21.54 GMT on September 11th. The BBC’s reporter Jane Stanley was in New York giving this on the spot report – with WTC-7 right behind her in the picture still standing! The video of her report faded out five minutes before its actual collapse! It collapsed at 22.20 GMT. Tony Rooke rightly sees this as DIRECT COMPLICITY IN AN ACT OF TERROR.

FoxNews also reported the collapse of WTC-7 before it happened:

…we are getting word from New York that another building has collapsed and we understand this is a 47 story building … is that smoke coming from this third collapse?

Take a look at that right hand of the screen.

It’s going down right now.

Source:
Edited by Scorpius
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has been posted before. Anyway

WTC7 on fire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@ Scorpius: Thank you for posting that ....... it's very interesting. I hope the campaign gets a hold and gathers momentum.

Edited by ouija ouija

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people today know in their hearts that the Official Conspiracy Theory is a hoax.

They may not be comfortable talking about it in public, but they know it's a hoax.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people today know in their hearts that the Official Conspiracy Theory is a hoax.

They may not be comfortable talking about it in public, but they know it's a hoax.

Considering that not one shred of evidence of a government conspiracy has surfaced after more than 11 years, your statement is unfounded by that very fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Most people today know in their hearts that the Official Conspiracy Theory is a hoax.

Let's take a look.because it looks like Al-Qaeda has a BIG lead over the United States.

617px-911worldopinionpoll_Sep2008_pie.png

800px-911worldopinionpoll_Sep2008.png

An Opinion Dynamics Corporation poll says only 4.2% of Americans believe Bush blew up the towers.

Edited by skyeagle409
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering that not one shred of evidence of a government conspiracy has surfaced after more than 11 years, your statement is unfounded by that very fact.

It's 11 years later Sky, and many many people have been investigating for most of that time. They have written well documented books about it. There is ample evidence, circumstantial and direct.

It's just that YOU happen to be either utterly UNaware of that evidence, or in some state of denial that it exists.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's 11 years later Sky, and many many people have been investigating for most of that time.

And, still no evidence of a government conspiracy was found.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ditto on that Skyeagle ! THe C.T`s need a CAT Scan ! :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And, still no evidence of a government conspiracy was found.

No evidence that YOU are able to perceive, or at least acknowledge.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

And, still no evidence of a government conspiracy was found.

It is the events that unfolded, which are raising flags to millions of people across the world, and it's showing us clues that something is amiss. I did also post an article claiming that the WTC7 fell before it should have.

This is one of the biggest conspiracies that I can think of in our world today. Millions of people around the world believe that something was not right and the the supposed coverage shown on air doesn't quite tell us who the real purpetrators were. Witnesses even on site believe that something wasn't right to begin with.

I honestly don't believe it was George Bush, I think some people give him far too much credit. There is a shakespear quote.

Jaques:

All the world's a stage,

And all the men and women merely players;

They have their exits and their entrances,

And one man in his time plays many parts,

His acts being seven ages.

It is the persons behind the curtains that we must unveil.

Skyeagle, by your statistics, your 46% is not even a passing grade unless the U.S. has lowered its standard even more. You should be questioning the pie chart you posted. I work around reports and if I found a 54% sector that isn't in my favour I would definitely question it's sources. A sector that is less than or equal to 10% would be understandable but 54% should have you questioning, regardless of what sectors are found in the 54% of that pie chart.

Edited by Scorpius
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They can hide a conspiracy for many many years look at the jfk conspiracy that happened 53 years ago and the thruth still has not been told

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No evidence that YOU are able to perceive, or at least acknowledge.

There is no evidence of a government conspiracy, which explains why 911 Truthers have been unable to produce such evidence. In a country full of investigative reporters looking for a sensational story to further their careers, how many government officials have been charged and imprisoned for the 911 attacks?

Remember, American Airlines and United Airlines confirmed the loss of their aircraft during the 911 attacks and personal effects and remains of many of the passengers and crew of those flights have been recovered and identified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They can hide a conspiracy for many many years look at the jfk conspiracy that happened 53 years ago and the thruth still has not been told

How long did it take for the Watergate scandal to be revealed to the world? What happened to Vice President Spiro Agnew?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

It is the events that unfolded, which are raising flags to millions of people across the world, and it's showing us clues that something is amiss. I did also post an article claiming that the WTC7 fell before it should have.

WTC7 collapse due to fire, which was evident when witnesses noticed a huge bulge on WTC7 and heard stress noises emanating from within WTC7 before it collapsed. Those were clear signs that fire was weakening the steel structure and why firefighters were ordered away from WTC7.

This is one of the biggest conspiracies that I can think of in our world today.

I can't find a single piece of evidence supporting a government conspiracy. I see signs that our intelligence services dropped the ball, but nothing to do with a government conspiracy. It should be noted that the Philippine government warned the United States in 1995 that muslim terrorist had plans to fly airliners into the Pentagon, CIA headquarters, the Capitol building and other U.S. landmarks.

In the months prior to the attacks, countries around the world sent out warnings to the United States that muslim terrorist were in the final planning stages of carrying out their attacks on America and there was nothing in those warnings to suggest a U.S. government conspiracy because the warnings were pointing their fingers at muslim terrorist..

I might add that the terrorist the Philippine government exposed in the planned attacks was none other than Ramzi Yousef.

200px-Ramzi_Yousef.gif

The terrorist who built and detonated that huge bomb beneath WTC1 in 1993.

WTC_1993_ATF_Commons.jpg

You will notice that the huge bomb did not destroy the steel columns even though they are sitting within the bomb crater. I might add that Yousef is also the nephew of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the 911 attacks.

220px-Khalid_Shaikh_Mohammed_after_capture.jpg

Yousef, was the same terrorist who planted that bomb on an airliner that killed a Japanese passenger, not to mention other bombs in the Philippines.

Philippine Airlines Flight 434

On December 11, 1994 the Boeing 747-283B, tail number EI-BWF, was flying on the second leg of the route, from Cebu to Tokyo, when a bomb planted by terrorist Ramzi Yousef exploded, killing one passenger.

http://en.wikipedia....ines_Flight_434

Millions of people around the world believe that something was not right and the the supposed coverage shown on air doesn't quite tell us who the real purpetrators were. Witnesses even on site believe that something wasn't right to begin with.

Looking at the poll, the majority of people blamed al-Qaeda, not the United States.

617px-911worldopinionpoll_Sep2008_pie.png

Skyeagle, by your statistics, your 46% is not even a passing grade unless the U.S. has lowered its standard even more. You should be questioning the pie chart you posted. I work around reports and if I found a 54% sector that isn't in my favour I would definitely question it's sources. A sector that is less than or equal to 10% would be understandable but 54% should have you questioning, regardless of what sectors are found in the 54% of that pie chart.

Let me add another.

800px-911worldopinionpoll_Sep2008.png

As you can see, the United States is not even close.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Ditto on that Skyeagle ! THe C.T`s need a CAT Scan ! :tu:

Seems to me that the 911 Truthers are unaware they have been duped and haven't figured out that some of the junk they have posted were planted as a means to discredit the 911 Truther movement.

The Dimitri Khalezov "WTC was nuked" hoax

For years, various disinformation agents have been attempting to sabotage the 9/11 truth movement with claims that "mini-nukes" or "nuclear devices" were used to demolish the World Trade Center.

Even Steven Jones debunked claims that nukes were used.

The absurdity of the "WTC was nuked" hoax

An excellent refutation of the "WTC was nuked" claims was provided by Dr. Steven E. Jones, entitled "Hard Evidence Repudiates the Hypothesis that Mini-Nukes Were Used on the WTC Towers". He summarized a few key points as:

  1. Observation of tritium (an important component of hydrogen-bomb fuel) at WTC sites at the few nano-curie level only. This is strong evidence against the mini-nuke hypothesis.
  2. The fact that radioactive iodine concentrations were actually lower in the upper/WTC debris-filled layers.
  3. Radioactive hot-spots in NYC were found to be due to radium, which is traceable to industrial uses (not bombs). This in itself does not rule out mini-nukes, but these data certainly do not support the mini-nuke hypothesis.
  4. Lioy et al. report that radioactivity from thorium, uranium, actinium series and other radionuclides is at or near the background level for WTC dust.
  5. Nuclear activation or residual "fall-out" radioactivity (above background) was NOT observed, in tests performed by the author on actual WTC samples. This result is consistent with the low Iodine-131 measured by independent researchers (point 2 above) and the low radionuclide counts (point 4 above) and again provides compelling evidence against the mini-nuke-at-Towers hypothesis.
  6. No fatalities due to radiation "burning" were reported near ground zero. William Rodriguez survived the North Tower collapse.
  7. No observed melting of glass due to the collapse-process of the Towers.
  8. One more: The mini-nuke idea fails completely for WTC 7 where vertically-directed plumes of dust were absent during the collapse, and the building fell quite neatly onto its own footprint. (Molten metal was observed under the WTC7 rubble as well.)

Some promoters of the "nuclear demolitions" baloney, such as Gordon Duff, cite as 'evidence' a claim that 9/11 first responders have been dying from "radiation sickness".

No one died of radiation sickness. If there was danger from radiation,ground zero would have been cordoned off and signs such as the following would have been evident for the whole world to see.

main_radiation_0.jpg

p276-1-jpg.jpg

628x471.jpg

Perhaps, the 911 Truthers will realize they were duped and have been taken for a ride to the cleaners.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont mind sky folks. He has for some strange reason made it his lifes mission to try and debunk 9/11, well inconsistancies, (to say the least). Its the only thing he posts about. Its almost as if someone gave him a full time job to do so. Reality is most people informed on this planet dont believe the official story. Here is a poll by CNN of all people. Many places around the world have had similar results.

CNN Poll: 90% Believe US Government Covering Up 9/11

Infowars.com

November 12, 2004

Yesterday we reported that 89% of people responded that they believed there was a US government cover-up surrounding 9/11. Later that same day the poll now indicated that 90 percent believe there was a cover-up.

The information of government prior knowledge and involvement in the September 11th attacks is extensive - please visit our archive.

Please scroll down below the cnn poll information to read more about the September 11th cover-up. cnnpoll.jpg

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Dont mind sky folks. He has for some strange reason made it his lifes mission to try and debunk 9/11, well inconsistancies, (to say the least). Its the only thing he posts about. Its almost as if someone gave him a full time job to do so. Reality is most people informed on this planet dont believe the official story. Here is a poll by CNN of all people. Many places around the world have had similar results.

CNN Poll: 90% Believe US Government Covering Up 9/11

Covering up doesn't mean they implicate the U.S. government. Check it out.

The latest Zogby poll asks if they believe the Government "Made it happen"... , only 4.2% agreed with this statement... 26.5 said they thought the government "Let it happen";

Big difference because the majority of Americans do not believe in a 911 government conspiracy. Learn to read the keywords correctly. It is no secret that our intelligence service dropped the ball despite warning from countries around the world that muslim terrorist, not the U.S. government, were planning to attack America. Did you really think the government is going to go pubic and admit that it dropped the 911 warning ball after ignoring all the warnings that were issued by a number of countries around the world?

In 1995, the Philippine government uncovered a plot to blowup airliners over the Pacific Ocean and fly airliners into the Capitol building, the Pentagon,the WTC buildings, CIA headquarters, and other American landmarks. That plot was revealed by the Philippine government and their warnings were forwarded to the United States. The terrorist involved in the plot at that time was the same person who detonated a huge bomb beneath WTC1 in 1993, and he is the nephew of the mastermind of the 911 attacks. I guess you might say that terrorism runs in their family.

Years later, other nations around the world had uncovered a similar terrorist plot against America just prior to the 911 attacks, and some warnings were issued by muslim countries, but our intelligence services failed to measure up to the task of protecting the American public and the amazing thing about that, is that blunders of our intelligence services continued even years after the 911 attacks.

I not only blame Bush and Rice for dropping the ball, but our intelligence services as well, but that does not mean implicating them in the 911 attacks, not be a long shot. They simply failed to measure up to their duties despite the warnings that were flowing in from around the world of an impending terrorist attack.

As the old saying goes, if you fail to learn from history, you are doomed to relive it. Speaking of history, General Billy Mitchell, had warned of a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1924. The United States was also warned by a double agent that Japanese were planning to attack America, but FBI director, J. Edgar Hoover, didn't take the warning seriously, and the rest became history on December 7, but getting back to General Billy Mitchell.

Billy Mitchell the Prophet

During World War II, some of Billy Mitchell's warning came through, none more so than his famous prediction of war with Japan. In an official report submitted after his trip around the Pacific Ocean in 1924, Mitchell warned that Japan's expansionism would lead to conflict with the United States, and he foretold how a war would start.

He stated that the war would begin with a surprise attack by Japanese forces on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, in conjunction with an assault on the Philippines.

Attack will be launched as follows:

Bombardment, attack to be made on Ford Island (in Pearl Harbor) at 7:30 a.m. ... Attack to be made on Clark Field (Philippines) at 10:40 a.m.

On Dec. 7, 1941, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor at 7:55 a.m. and Clark Field just hours later.

http://www.nationalm...heet.asp?id=739

There were those within the U.S. Army who thought that General Billy Mitchell was a crackpot, but his vision of an attack on Pearl and Clark Field in the Philippines became history decades later.

Edited by skyeagle409
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont mind sky folks. cnnpoll.jpg

Let's read the small print.

20041111195501242_1.jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Preacherman

That CNN poll was in 2004. My guess is that the percentage of people recognizing a coverup is even higher today. AE911Truth had their program air on PBS in Colorado.

Most folks prefer not to talk about it, but they understand the OCT is a lie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Preacherman

That CNN poll was in 2004. My guess is that the percentage of people recognizing a coverup is even higher today. AE911Truth had their program air on PBS in Colorado.

Most folks prefer not to talk about it, but they understand the OCT is a lie.

The official story is not a lie because It has been more than 11 years since the 911 attacks and yet after all of these years not one single shred of evidence has surfaced that implicates the U.S. government in the 911 attacks. I blame Bush, Rice, and our intelligence services for dropping the ball despite warnings flowing in from around the world that muslim terrorist were planning to attack America. In fact, warnings were issued in 1995 from the Philippine government.

The terrorist who detonated a bomb aboard Philippine Airlines Flight 434, was Ramzi Yousef, the same terrorist who detonated a bomb beneath WTC1 in 1994 and nephew of Khālid Shaykh Muḥammad, the terrorist who has now admitted to his role in the planning of the 911 attacks.

Nothing there that refutes the official story.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot fully back the Tony Rooke case against the BBC. It is my conclusion that the pre-emptive report of the WTC7 collapse was a result of the apparent foreknowledge of what was to occur on scene, passed on by the media, rather than any collusion or cover-up of the BBC. I still believe this worthy of further investigation to determine the reporter and source responsible.

Skyeagle, by your statistics, your 46% is not even a passing grade unless the U.S. has lowered its standard even more. You should be questioning the pie chart you posted. I work around reports and if I found a 54% sector that isn't in my favour I would definitely question it's sources. A sector that is less than or equal to 10% would be understandable but 54% should have you questioning, regardless of what sectors are found in the 54% of that pie chart.

Skyeagle has shown an embarrassing inability to interpret figures and other data many times - his posting of a survey showing that a majority of respondents are not in agreement with his argument is par for the course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skyeagle has shown an embarrassing inability to interpret figures and other data many times - his posting of a survey showing that a majority of respondents are not in agreement with his argument is par for the course.

Not to mention he is a paid shrill. Cue block of quoted text..... Now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I cannot fully back the Tony Rooke case against the BBC. It is my conclusion that the pre-emptive report of the WTC7 collapse was a result of the apparent foreknowledge of what was to occur on scene, passed on by the media, rather than any collusion or cover-up of the BBC. I still believe this worthy of further investigation to determine the reporter and source responsible.

Common sense dictates that if you are going to blow up a building illegally, you don't broadcast your intentions to the whole world. To prove my point, in this country of numerous investigative reporters looking for a great story, how many produced evidence that implicated the U.S. government in the 911 attacks? No names to add and you have no case. :no:

Skyeagle has shown an embarrassing inability to interpret figures and other data many times - his posting of a survey showing that a majority of respondents are not in agreement with his argument is par for the course.

On the contrary, looking at the facts, they did not implicate the U.S. government in carrying out the 911 attacks. Cover-up does not mean the U.S. government was involved in planting explosives. The government doesn't want to admit it dropped the 911 ball especially since warnings were flowing in from around the world that blamed muslim terrorist for the 911 attacks, not the U.S. government.

Other than Bush and Rice, our intelligence services also dropped the ball and a prime example is where the CIA was suppose to track terrorist in Malaysia, when in fact, the terrorist they were suppose to be tracking in Malaysia were actually in Thailand. In other words, the CIA and the FBI continued to commit blunder after blunder after blunder prior to 911, which is why the CIA and the FBI later admitted to their mistakes in regards to the 911 attacks. Nothing to do with a government conspiracy.

C.I.A. Lays Out Errors It Made Before Sept. 11

WASHINGTON, Aug. 21 — A report released Tuesday by the Central Intelligence Agency includes new details of the agency’s missteps before the Sept. 11 attacks, outlining what the report says were failures to grasp the role being played by the terror mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and to assess fully the threats streaming into the C.I.A. in the summer of 2001.

The 19-page report, prepared by the agency’s inspector general, also says 50 to 60 C.I.A. officers knew of intelligence reports in 2000 that two of the Sept. 11 hijackers, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, may have been in the United States. But none of those officers thought to notify the Federal Bureau of Investigation about the potential domestic threat, the report says, evidence of what it calls a systemic failure.

The inspector general recommended that several top agency officials, including former director George J. Tenet, be held accountable for their failure to put in place a strategy to dismantle Al Qaeda in the years before Sept. 11, 2001. Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the current C.I.A. director, and his predecessor, Porter J. Goss, have declined to seek disciplinary action against Mr. Tenet and others named in the report.

http://www.nytimes.c...?pagewanted=all

9/11: Three Major Mistakes

The CIA's chief legal officer from 2001-2009 reflects on what we did wrong—and on the lessons we've learned.

http://www.hoover.or...s/article/91992

The Deafness Before the Storm

On Aug. 6, 2001, President George W. Bush received a classified review of the threats posed by Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network, Al Qaeda. That morning’s “presidential daily brief” — the top-secret document prepared by America’s intelligence agencies — featured the now-infamous heading: “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” A few weeks later, on 9/11, Al Qaeda accomplished that goal.

http://www.nytimes.c...1-warnings.html

Nothing there that even remotely suggest the U.S. government modified aircraft as flying bombs or the planting of explosives in buildings. Such massive 911 intelligence blunders are not something the government would enjoy broadcasting to the whole world.

Edited by skyeagle409
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention he is a paid shrill....

Where's the money?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.