THE BEST DISASTER THESBIANS THREAD.

Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
979
Likes
3,253
#61
I can feel another complaint coming on...
Even though the subject is serious, ^ that is a good addition to your already interesting and informative post. Full respect to you for not only participating here, in online discussions, but also working, if at times frustratingly, to effectuate change in the so called "real" world.
 





Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
2,532
Likes
3,746
#62

Even though the subject is serious, ^ that is a good addition to your already interesting and informative post. Full respect to you for not only participating here, in online discussions, but also working, if at times frustratingly, to effectuate change in the so called "real" world.
It's something I feel very strongly about @Serveto , thank you for the kind words.

These type of lies do need exposing to as many people as possible, I hope it makes people angry because at least anger drives people to do something.

This level of media manipulation is bordering on Orwellian.
 





Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
2,532
Likes
3,746
#63
Before I post any more videos I'll share a theory with you....

Re: Vegas False Flag
by Awoken2 on Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:50 am

Today I've been trying to solve the puzzle of why the mainstream media employ extremely poor crisis actors to tell highly implausaable stories after these staged events which we are now constantly bombarded with.

Here is my theory.

Since 9/11 the psychopaths who really run the world have had only one real threat to their anonymity and their nefarious actions and that was social media platforms such as YouTube etc. People who didn't buy into the bullshit started doing their own investigations and were sharing their findings.

Now this was a problem, sure they owned all the media and newspapers but the word was getting out that big big lies had been told by the Government to it's people. It had to be stopped.

So how do you stop a group of people from sharing damaging information on social media?

There is a war going on right now and it's a war of information. Knowledge is power and they don't want a public with the right knowledge.

So how about creating some fake terror attack, lots of people dead, do the ISIS thing then get some really poor actors on the telly who's actions alone arouse the suspicion of the conspiracy theorists/awakened. Now you've got all the real truthers making more videos exposing these terrible crisis actors and then you get this... You can't be making videos about "conspiracy theories" because it's disrespectful to the people that died, channel gets shut down, another truther is silenced.

It's happening now and has been happening for years. I can virtually guarantee you that some time soon it will be standard policy for YouTube to shut down anybody who tries to expose the mainstream media.

It's getting more Orwellian by the day.


...I've just gone through my list of crisis actor videos from YouTube, the recent purge has now took down over 80% of them. No longer available for public scrutiny.

I think this fact alone validates my post made back in October.
Do you think maybe I was on to something?


https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/dec/04/google-youtube-hire-moderators-child-abuse-videos

http://www.renegadetribune.com/google-deploys-adl-censorship-police-youtube/
 





Last edited:
Joined
Sep 8, 2018
Messages
607
Likes
890
#64
by Awoken2 on Mon Jul 03, 2017 2:42 pm

I have just got off the phone to the Sun and their response was absolutely staggering.

I get connected to Hannah on the news desk and inform her that I have got some information in relation to the story they ran on 15th June about Pat, the man who allegedly caught a 4 year old child who was thrown from a sixth story window.
The excitement in Hanna's voice raised considerably making it more than obvious that they were still in the dark about Pat's identity. I asked Hannah to get a pen.

I then spelled out the name Oluwaseun Nesky Talabi very slowly ensuring that Hannah had the correct spelling.
Hannah then asks me how I know Olu, was he a personal friend? I replied that I knew him from watching the BBC news coverage as he has done a lot of interviews over the past couple of weeks.
Hannah then said they were aware of Olu but this was NOT the same person that was in their story.

I asked Hannah if she had seen the pictures printed on the Sun's news website on the 15th of June to which she says she hasn't. I then asked Hannah to look at the pictures and compare them to pictures of Olu and I would call back in ten minutes to see if she could see the similarity.

I tried speaking to Hannah a couple of times but she was unavailable for over an hour.
After finally getting through I asked Hannah her opinion. Her response was that although they do look similar they could not be the same person and any similarity was purely coincidental.

I then asked Hanna if I could speak to any of the three reporters or photographer who produced the story as I wanted to ask them where they got their information from. Hannah said this wasn't possible and just because a reporters name is on a story it doesn't necessarily mean they were at the scene at the time.... REALLY?

I then asked about the photographer who took the pictures, Hannah was now sounding a little panicky, the phone goes quite for a moment, I think Hannah is needing some help...

In a nutshell this is the Sun's response.

The information they were given came from a neighbour who knew Pat, they didn't get any other information about the neighbour or any contact details. So the information came from an anonymous third party and this was not verified.

The photographs were not taken by a Sun photographer and were taken by an eye witness who again remains anonymous.

I asked Hannah if it was common practice to print a story with information gained from anonymous and unverified sources and print them as fact as this would be a sure fire way of creating fake news.
Hannah then explains that The Sun take any complaints very seriously and have their own department for anyone who isn't happy with their reporting. I declined to take them up on this offer and instead said I would be contacting IPSO , at this point Hannah hung up!

Fake news at it's very worst!

So, not to be thwarted I decided to go up the food chain and complain to IPSO. Surely they would act?....

So I made an official complaint to IPSO about the ridiculous story printed in the Sun on 12th July. They usually reply within three days. I received this reply today...3 weeks later

"Dear Mr ######

I write further to our earlier email regarding your complaint about an article headlined “HERO OF GRENFELL TOWER Brave man catches four-year-old girl thrown by mum from the 5th floor seconds before flat was engulfed in flames” published by thesun.co.uk on 15 June 2017.

On receipt of a complaint, IPSO’s Executive reviews it to ensure that it falls within our remit and raises a possible breach of the Editors’ Code of Practice. The Executive has now completed an assessment of your complaint under the terms of the Code. Having considered the points you have raised in full, we have concluded that your complaint does not raise a possible breach of the Editors’ Code.

We noted your concern that the report and the photo captions referred to a man as “Pat”, when you understood his name was Oluwaseun Nesky Talabi, in breach of Clause 1 (Accuracy). IPSO is able to consider complaints from an individual who has been personally and directly affected by the alleged breach of the Editors’ Code of Practice; complaints from a representative group affected by an alleged breach where there is a substantial public interest; and complaints from third parties about accuracy. In the case of third party complaints, we will need to consider the position of the party most closely involved. In this instance, the concerns you raised under this Clause relate directly to identity of the man in the photograph. Since you are not acting on his behalf with his knowledge and consent, we were unable to consider this aspect of your complaint further.


You told us you were also concerned that the photographs might breach Clause 1 (Accuracy) because you doubted their authenticity. While we understood that you were dissatisfied with the conversation you had with the Sun about the verification of photographs in general, your complaint did not provide grounds for finding that these photographs were not of incident described in the article.

Finally, you were concerned that the report might breach Clause 4 (Intrusion into grief or shock) because the story had no credibility and was a sensational story at a time when people were still in shock about a tragedy. The terms of this Clause are designed to protect those directly affected by grief or shock. As we explained above, when we receive third party complaints, we consider the position of the party most closely involved. In this instance, the concerns you raised under this Clause relate directly to those that have lost friends and family in the Grenfell fire. Since you are not acting on behalf someone directly affected by the fire, with their knowledge and consent, we were unable to consider this aspect of your complaint further.

You are entitled to request that the Executive’s decision to reject your complaint be reviewed by IPSO’s Complaints Committee. To do so you will need to write to us in the next seven days, setting out the reasons why you believe the decision should be reviewed. Please note that we are unable to accept requests for review made seven days after the date of this email.

We would like to thank you for giving us the opportunity to consider the points you have raised, and have shared this correspondence with the newspaper to make it aware of your concerns.

Best wishes,
Catherine Thomas

cc thesun.co.uk"

So in summary I can only question Oluwasean Talabi's identity if I'm acting on his behalf or have to have his permission to do so.

And unless you've been "directly affected" by a story you are not permitted to question it's authenticity.

It's a strange response because at no point was I ever asked if I had any connections to any Grenfell Tower survivors so their entire response was based on an assumption on their part.

I can feel another complaint coming on...


So on we go....

Dear Sir/Madam

I wish to have the Executives decision to reject my complaint reviewed for the following reasons.

Your response to my first point is based on an assumption that I am a third party who was not personally and directly affected by the alleged breach of the Editor's Code of Practice.

How did you come to this conclusion without asking me if I had been directly and personally affected?

In 1973, 44 years ago to this day I was at Summerland in the Isle of Man when a devastating fire broke out which killed many people, I managed to escape with my family that night but since then have a major phobia about fires and people being trapped.


I also have a good friend who teaches in Kensington and one of his pupils has not returned to class and is still unaccounted for. They were also deeply disturbed about the Sun's story and they have also supported my complaint.


The Sun's story about "Pat" who caught a child thrown from a fifth storey window is completely fabricated.


I spoke to Hannah on the Sun's newsdesk about this and she said that the information they were given came from an unidentified and unverified source.

The photographs used in the article were pictures of Oluwasean Talabi. The reason why I know this is because Mr Talabi himself has admitted that the Sun made the story up and used his pictures so how can this not be a direct breach of your code of Practice?

Am I then correct to assume by your response that a newspaper can print any story it wishes without any factual basis as long as the person in the story does not complain themselves?

Would this scenario not make your complaints process totally innefective if the person in question was in collusion with the newspaper to help create a sensationalist storyline?

The story which was put out to the public was false and the subtitles under the photographs were also false. If this isn't a clear breach of your Code of Conduct then what is exactly?

The fact that my complaint was not investigated because I didn't "qualify" is not acceptable and the fact that you didn't even question the Sun about this ridiculous and highly offensive article is even more upsetting.

I would like this matter to be looked at again without prejudice.

And here is their laughable response ...

Dear Mr #####$

The Complaints Committee has considered your complaint, the email of 27 July 2017 from IPSO’s Executive notifying you of its view that your complaint did not raise a possible breach of the Editors’ Code of Practice, and your email of 2 August 2017 requesting a review of the Executive’s decision.

The Committee acknowledged that you have been affected by the article. However, under the terms of the Editors’ Code, to take forward a third party complaint under Clause 1 (Accuracy), the Committee must consider the individual about whom the alleged inaccuracy most directly affects. In this instance, the Committee decided that the alleged inaccuracies in your complaint related directly to the man identified in the article, and it would not be possible or appropriate for us to investigate the complaint without his input. As such, the Committee declined to re-open your complaint.

We refer to the guidance published on our website in relation to this matter: https://www.ipso.co.uk/make-a-complaint/.

The Committee would like to thank you for giving it the opportunity to consider your concerns.

Best wishes,

Lauren Sloan


....If this sorry saga doesn't prove that our news is fake I don't know what does.


The cognitive dissonance and lying are mired in the narcissism that is destroying the planet.

WOW!!!
 





Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
2,532
Likes
3,746
#65
Some people really do struggle to believe that crisis actors do actually exist. Reading this may help.

*Amazing fact*

It is actually LEGAL for the American Government to lie to it's people

Smith-Mundt Modernization Act 2012


Watch this pathetic war criminal take a question about Government propaganda that he obviously hadn't been briefed on.


This is not just an American problem, it happens world wide. A disturbing but insightful read.

https://truepublica.org.uk/united-kingdom/how-britains-propaganda-machine-controls-what-you-think/
 





Last edited:
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
3,448
Likes
6,880
#68
Some people really do struggle to believe that crisis actors do actually exist. Reading this may help.

*Amazing fact*

It is actually LEGAL for the American Government to lie to it's people

Smith-Mundt Modernization Act 2012


Watch this pathetic war criminal take a question about Government propaganda that he obviously hadn't been briefed on.


This is not just an American problem, it happens world wide. A disturbing but insightful read.

https://truepublica.org.uk/united-kingdom/how-britains-propaganda-machine-controls-what-you-think/
From the article:
"In terms of Britain’s media, the reality is that there are 5 billionaires who run our media, and they have huge power in our democracy forcing our political parties to prioritize their wishes over the wishes of the British public. These 5 people not only own 80% of the newspapers we read every day, they also own TV stations, press agencies, book companies, cinemas, so everything we think or speak about in Britain is nearly controlled entirely by these 5 men.

These are the men in control : Rupert Murdoch, Jonathon Harmsworth, Richard Desmond and the Barclay’s Twins. None of these people live in Britain."


Inotherwords, those 5 men are directly responsible for the “steady stream of cultural puke and sewage”, as are their American counterparts. They permit their media empires to disseminate said sewage, which keeps the average person glued to any screen, for ratings and advertiser monies. So, when the Daily Mail publishes this:
Everything we read, watch and buy online will be controlled by government by 2025, claim experts
I guess that by “government-controlled”, in that headline, I should read those 5 billionaires and their American counterparts in place of “government”.


Anyway, its the same story everywhere. I wonder how high Germany ranked on the chart that John Cleese wielded.
1548973557530.png

Egypt
 





Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
2,532
Likes
3,746
#70
Here is Mahad Eghal again, telling lies on the BBC to the British public. The lies are in regard to the conditions he encountered on leaving the building. He talks about thick black smoke only allowing vision to arms length, he talks about it being dark and having to use wet towels to help breathing, but this was simply not the case.

After hearing all the evidence from the fire fighters who tackled the blaze in flat 16 they all stated categorilly that there was little to no smoke on the 4th floor even ten minutes after Maghal had walked out of the building.


So here now is part of his written statement, again he states (under a statement of truth) that the foyer and stairs were heavily smoke logged.

Radwan, came to visit and we sat outside the tower together chatting and smoking in the
green area between the leisure centre and tower.
15. Radwan then left for Ladbroke Grove and I went back inside and upstairs to my flat. To
the best of my recollection, it was about 12:30am when I went up the stairs and I do not
recall seeing or hearing anything at all on my way up.
16. When I got back to my flat, the kids were asleep and Jamie was in the living room. I
started preparing myself something to eat and I asked Jamie if she wanted anything.
There was some left-over pizza and Jamie wanted this. I put the pizza in the oven to
reheat it for her. I remember that there was a funny clanking sound that came from the
electric oven. It sounded like a mechanical sound. It was a brand-new oven and I had
never heard it make a sound like that before. Jamie heard it as well and asked me to open
the oven and let the air out.
17. I made toast with jam and 2 cups of tea and gave Jamie her pizza, then I sat down with
her and ate and drank my tea. I remember Jamie was on her laptop and watching the
Housewives series. When I had finished eating, I asked her what time it was and she said
it was just before lam from her computer clock. I recall saying that we need to hurry up
and go to bed as it was late and I had a client to email early in the morning.
The fire: early stnes
18. It cannot have been more than a minute or so after this that there was the sound of
knocking from our front door. It was not a normal knock and I can only describe it as
loud, mad knocking. It was with urgency. I remember being startled by the knock because
of the way that it sounded and because of the lateness of the hour.
19. I told Jamie to stay where she was and I went to investigate. I went straight to the front
door so it cannot have been more than a few seconds before I looked through the spyhole
but I could not see anything because it was too dark. That is when I decided to open the
door. I opened the door slowly and cautiously due to the late hour. Immediately a large
amount of dense, dark grey smoke came whooshing past me into the flat behind me. I
remember it blowing into my face. I have a brief recollection of seeing the hallway filled
with dense, black smoke. I did not see anybody there but I only took a brief look.

With him being so vociferous to the world's press immediately after the fire you would have thought this public inquiry would be an ideal platform for him to again tell the story of his escape?

Ok so let's have a look at Mahad Eghal's contribution

I hr 11mins 43 secs Mahad Eghal's evidence to the inquiry.


So his lies were quietly ignored and he wasn't asked to give any verbal evidence under oath either.

Below is the fourth statement given by Behailu Kebede, the tenant of the flat where the fire started.

Further to my first statement to police, I have been asked about a neighbour I referred to as a 'Somali guy' who took some time to leave the flat that night after I went round knocking on everyone's doors.
This neighbour lived next door to me but I am not actually sure of the door number.l have drawn a diagram which I produce as exhibit BEK/3 to illustrate he moved in about six months earlier with his young children, one or two.l think two.l have never spoken to him and I do not know his name but since the fire I have seen him giving interviews to news channels on TV and on YouTube.l think he may be about forty, with a beard, and he has clearly been in the UK a long time from how he speaks.
I saw this man say in one interview that I told him my fridge "exploded" .1 want to make clear I definitely never used the word "exploded", I cannot remember exactly what I did say apart from saying "fire fire". Just to be clear, I did not even see flames in my kitchen before leaving.l have also been told by friends that this neighbourhas been telling people that we saw each other outside the building that night and he hugged me. This is not true, I have never seen him again after knocking on his door.l have just looked up another interview he did on YouTube and this gives his name as "Mahad EGAL"
 





Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
2,532
Likes
3,746
#71
Grenfell Tower.

Here is a post I made on another Forum on the day after the fire. It captures my initial thoughts and feelings as I watched the building burn on live tv.I had been up through the night watching events.

"Unless that building's recent renovations used only the most combustible materials known to man I'm struggling to see a fire caused and propagated by natural causes here.

As I'm writing this the tower is still burning...34 hrs later! The pictures on TV show how intense the flames were. How can a fire rage like that unless there was materials throughout that building that were extremely flammable?

The point being if you would have saturated a 28 storey stone constructed block of flats in petrol and set it alight it wouldn't have burned with the same intensity as what we have all witnessed here.

The fact that all the residents had specific instructions to stay in their rooms in the event of a fire is even more disturbing, especially when there was no sprinkler system in place. The fact that over 90% of the residents were Muslims also could be used to inflame religious tensions is also very worrying.

London Bridge attack, Manchester concert and now this?...... And more worryingly, what's next?

Following on from that....

I would not be foolish enough to publicly disclose who I think the perpetrators of this sorry episode are but I feel I do have a responsibility to expose the mainstream news when opportunity presents itself.

It is simply not acceptable to allow our news channels to lie to us, their job is to inform but they are now used to mould our perceptions. This can not continue, people need to become aware of what's at stake here.

From watching the tragedy unfold live on tv I've followed this story very very closely. I sensed something was very wrong at the time. The more I have learned about this event the more sinister and disturbing it gets.

There are other important elements to consider before accepting this as some type of tragic accident.

On top of the callous neglect the residents of that building suffered prior to the fire you also need to take into account that other factors contributed to what we all saw.

The fire brigade were not just unequipped to deal with this devestating fire they were virtually disabled on the night. From inadequate water pressure on the turning ladder to inoperable communications. The communication system in place was too complex and ineffective. None of the attending fire fighters had been given any practical or written training on how to deal with the situation they were faced with. Every fire fighter giving evidence clearly states that they had never seen a fire react like that, it was beyond their capabilities.... if it wasn't for a resident with a key fob arriving to let them in after 2 minutes waiting even more people would have died. Would you believe it if I told you that on the two previous fire safety visits to Grenfell Tower they couldn't get in...because they didn't have a key fob?

We then had certain individuals put forward by the MSN to tell us their stories of how they escaped the building. Some of these stories appeared suspect due to the general manner in which they were told. It has subsequently transpired that most of those stories were completely untrue, totally fabricated. I cannot reconcile to coincidence the fact that four of the media's interviewed survivors and witnesses all told lies about either their escape or their actions on the night. This in itself is extremely questionable. Why would these people need to lie? Why could they not just tell the truth?

Then there is the subliminal implanting of the event prior to it happening. All events start in mind, to transmute this to the masses minds they use entertainment. Dua Lipa and Sean Paul singing "gonna get lit tonight" filmed at Trellick Tower, just down the road from Grenfell that coincidentally had it's own fire some months later. Fortunately the LFB were able to contain that situation despite a faulty water pump on the wet riser rendering them without water for the first 20 minutes.

We also had Plan B write the movie Ill Manors which depicted a scene of a baby being thrown from the window of a burning building. One of the songs on the soundtrack of the film was filmed on location at a block of flats very similar in structure and appearance to Grenfell Tower. That video implanted images of fire and flats together.

Even more sinister is the fact that one of the survivors of the fire who was used by the media to peddle lies was also reported to have caught a baby thrown out of a window by our newspapers, which was later proven to be fabricated.

As far as any legal implications of me making these posts is concerned there should be nothing to worry about. I am simply presenting information which is out in the public domain.

All these things considered should at least make somebody question the "official narrative".... which has been a dubious term in itself since 9/11.

If you don't stand up for something, you'll fall for anything....so to speak.
 





Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
2,532
Likes
3,746
#72
I've sat through every single painful minute of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry. I've seen and heard it all. Allow me to show you how and why this fire was able to get totally out of control resulting in the deaths of 72 people making it the biggest loss of life due to fire since WW2.

The answer to the above question can be revealed by watching one simple video. This is Prof Luke Bisby's evidence submission to the Inquiry relating to vertical fire spread.

I will answer the most obvious question that will be screaming out from anybody who watches the video before playing the video.

The reason why the fire service did not apply any water to the exterior of the building for a full 13 minutes after arriving is because it's brigade policy not to apply water to an open window apparature if there are fire fighters inside that room. This would endanger the fire crews inside.

Therefore the fire was allowed to take hold of the highly combustible, water impervious cladding which would then turn the building into a raging inferno.....putting everybody in tbe building in danger. By the time water was applied it was totally useless in tackling the fire.

 





Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
3,448
Likes
6,880
#73
One Man’s Quest to Expose a Fake BBC Video about Syria

*****

1560464410901.png

A respected German analytical TV program opened its latest edition by informing viewers that Russian forces intruded into the Baltics. Was this “fantasy” just juvenile attention-seeking, or crude pro-NATO propaganda?

“Together with European and German allies, the US army is currently moving through land, air and sea to Estonia to expel Russian forces, which have once again invaded, as in Crimea before,” announced a worried Claus Kleber, host of heute journal, on the national public broadcaster ZDF Thursday night.

As millions of viewers tensed up, the veteran host announced that it was a “gotcha!”

“Do not worry. It is not true. This is just a fantasy scenario – but a realistic one,” said Kleber.
Claus Kleber, host of heute-journal, delivers his dire news.

One of the biggest names in German journalism, Kleber explained that the fake-out was designed to make it clear that a war may be imminent, that it is likely to be a surprise, and that Germany will have to defend even its smallest allies, including Estonia.
 





Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
2,532
Likes
3,746
#74
One Man’s Quest to Expose a Fake BBC Video about Syria

*****

View attachment 23047

A respected German analytical TV program opened its latest edition by informing viewers that Russian forces intruded into the Baltics. Was this “fantasy” just juvenile attention-seeking, or crude pro-NATO propaganda?

“Together with European and German allies, the US army is currently moving through land, air and sea to Estonia to expel Russian forces, which have once again invaded, as in Crimea before,” announced a worried Claus Kleber, host of heute journal, on the national public broadcaster ZDF Thursday night.

As millions of viewers tensed up, the veteran host announced that it was a “gotcha!”

“Do not worry. It is not true. This is just a fantasy scenario – but a realistic one,” said Kleber.
Claus Kleber, host of heute-journal, delivers his dire news.


One of the biggest names in German journalism, Kleber explained that the fake-out was designed to make it clear that a war may be imminent, that it is likely to be a surprise, and that Germany will have to defend even its smallest allies, including Estonia.
I'll be keeping a close eye on this. Thanks for posting it. I'm sitting on a lot of info that can expose this bunch of criminals. I may start networking and sharing what I have.

I'm fully behind anyone who's trying to expose the media.
 





Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
2,532
Likes
3,746
#75
We were told too many lies. This interview was broadcast ON BBC NEWS on 14th June, just a few hours after the fire started. The very first mistake she made was claiming to hear people screaming and fire engines...a full 45 minutes before the fire started. Here you can hear all of her spurious shite for yourselves.


The lies get worse, much worse. Here is BBC Newsnights coverage of the event. The first thing you need to know is that the actor named as Jody Martin is in fact somebody called Jordy Norbis, this has been revealed in the Grenfell Tower Inquiry and is on record. It's only actors that use stage names, not witnesses to a real event.

When listening to BBC presenter George Clark explaining what he witnessed he makes the claim HE SAW A BABY GET DROPPED FROM A WINDOW (3 min 55 seconds)

We also have the first appearance of Francis Dean, named as the Brother of Zaynab Dean who died in flat 114 with her 2 year old son. This information was repeated on his interview with ABC news.


Here we know learn that Zaynub wasn't in fact Zaynabs brother but his friend.


By the time the Inquiry started Francis was Zaynabs friend, not her brother.

As soon as these lies were starting to get exposed the BBC start their incredible damage limitation exercise. As soon as they knew their charade was unravelling, the cover up started.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41550836

If you have any doubt about this being nothing but a filthy cover up just listen to how the BBC dealt with all of tbe above.

 





Last edited:
Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
2,532
Likes
3,746
#76
Here we have Mike Dowden's evidence to the inquiry. Dowden was the initial Incident Commander. He was in charge of the incident until being relieved by a superior some 50 minutes later. Mr Dowden's rank of Watch Manager only permitted him to take charge of a 4 pump fire, despite this he was left in charge of the whole operation even when 20 pumps were at the scene. After listening to this mans evidence the only conclusion any sane person can cone to is that he has been selected as a scapegoat.

The explanation he gives regarding how the fire was able to spread is nonsensical. His actions and decisions all directly contributed towards the total catastrophe that followed.

The video posted in post #72 clearly shows how the fire was able to burn on the exterior of the building for a full 12 minutes before water was applied. If you watched the video and saw the images for yourself then the verbal evidence submitted to the inquiry by Mr Dowden makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Listen to Mr Dowden's explanation of events from the 2 hrs 33 minute mark.


What's important to understand at this point is what the people inside the building WERE NOT AWARE OF whilst all this was unfolding. I'll list just a few important and highly relevant points here.

The fire fighters were all working of an ORD (operational risk database) that was 7 years out of date. The ORD stated that it was a
24 storey building despite it being changed to a 21 storey building after renovations.

The fire fighters were unable to get into the building initially due to them not having a key fob.

The fire fighters did not have a working fire lift. It was inoperable

The smoke ventilation system was broken.

The communal fire alarm system had been disconnected prior to renovations and not re-connected afterwards.

The building was covered in a highly flammable cladding that was impervious to water.

The fire fighters communication systems were ineffective and couldn't cope with the high volume of traffic.

All the emergency call handlers in the control room were giving advice to stay in the building because they couldn't see any live pictures of how fast the fire was spreading due to the control room tv being turned off on the night.

Taking just these few factors into account would lead any rational person to believe that this fire wasn't as accidental as the official narrative would have you believe.

The fact that the majority of victims and witnesses used by the mainstream news channels all turned out to be telling lies is also a very pertinent.

I shall be exposing all these frauds in this thread in due course.
 





Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
2,532
Likes
3,746
#78
From the article:
"In terms of Britain’s media, the reality is that there are 5 billionaires who run our media, and they have huge power in our democracy forcing our political parties to prioritize their wishes over the wishes of the British public. These 5 people not only own 80% of the newspapers we read every day, they also own TV stations, press agencies, book companies, cinemas, so everything we think or speak about in Britain is nearly controlled entirely by these 5 men.

These are the men in control : Rupert Murdoch, Jonathon Harmsworth, Richard Desmond and the Barclay’s Twins. None of these people live in Britain."

Inotherwords, those 5 men are directly responsible for the “steady stream of cultural puke and sewage”, as are their American counterparts. They permit their media empires to disseminate said sewage, which keeps the average person glued to any screen, for ratings and advertiser monies. So, when the Daily Mail publishes this:
Everything we read, watch and buy online will be controlled by government by 2025, claim experts
I guess that by “government-controlled”, in that headline, I should read those 5 billionaires and their American counterparts in place of “government”.


Anyway, its the same story everywhere. I wonder how high Germany ranked on the chart that John Cleese wielded.
View attachment 19054

Egypt
A closer look at the method

 





Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
3,448
Likes
6,880
#79
A closer look at the method

Instead of using direct terror, which is all too obvious (though it is selectively employed when needed), the social engineers, using a clever concoction of chemically-laced food and water, mass media entertainment, contrived social controversies, and technological gadgets, have found a successful means of keeping modern man in his place. And modern man believes himself to be liberated, more free than ever before.

Rage Against the Machine Man