9/11 Court Case Before a Judge at Horsham Monday 25 Feb

[TonyGosling]

To Reinvestigate 911 and Accountable Democracy List

1. Promising 9/11 Court Case Before a Judge at Horsham Monday February 25

2. Diary Date: RI911 Public Meeting, Conway Hall, London, evening Tuesday April 30 April

3. Exciting Developments at Accountable Democracy's RADTV UK.

4. Together for the Charter - New Online Campaign to call for BBC Accountability


1. Promising 9/11 Court Case Before a Judge at Horsham Monday February 25

Congratulations to Anthony Rooke of Christians for 9/11 Truth. Anthony is refusing to pay his TV license on the grounds that, by suppressing the truth about 9/11, the BBC is aiding and abetting terrorism. Under Section 15 Article 3 of the draconian Terrorism Act 2000, if there is any possibility that you might be aiding terrorism you are obliged to refuse.

The outline of Tony's case has been accepted as arguable, and a full hearing is scheduled for the morning of Monday 25 February at Magistrates' Court, West Sussex in front of a judge. Expert witnesses are attending, including chemist Niels Harrit, an expert on the collapse of the Twin Towers and Building 7, while author Ian Henshall will testify on the BBC's repeated and palpably false claim that the 9/11 sceptic case has been adequately investigated.

You are invited to attend and respectfully show support for Tony. Please do not assume the judge is biased against us. Even if he finds against Tony he may make comments which could be very useful in confronting the BBC Trust.

2. Public Meeting, Conway Hall, London, evening Tuesday April 30 April

Reinvestigate 9/11 has booked the Brockway Room at Conway Hall, Red Lion Square for the evening of Tuesday 30 April. Entrance will be free or very little. Please put in your diary straight away and look out for more news.

We have the room from 6.00pm to 10.00pm and tea coffee and cakes will be on offer. It should be a good occasion for networking. We are still considering who to invite.

Ideas include a pilot who could explain why the official 9/11 story of the Al Qaeda pilots, with their astonishing flying and navigating skills, does not wash. We have various suggestions for who to invite but if you know any UK based pilots please email your details to info@reinvestigate911.org.

There will be an update on the UK court case and developments on the 9/11 paper trail including the International Criminal Court case and the bombshell admission that the CIA did conspire to protect the alleged 9/11 hijackers from arrest.

If you have more ideas for what to cover, are aware of new developments, or know of US based experts or campaigners who will be here on this date, please get in touch.

3. Exciting Developments at Accountable Democracy's RADTV UK.

RADTV UK is now filming fortnightly based on premises in Hackney, East London. We have overcome the various technical problems and are producing 30mts of Youtube footage from each session. We could use more help but already we are attracting interest from film students and some highly experienced film professionals.

We are now confident enough to put it on a public Youtube channel, RADTV UK and when there is more material up there we will ask you to help publicise it. We are within reach of having all the various websites, twitter accounts, youtube channels etc fully integrated. Meanwhile the ideas floated by Accountable Democracy seem to be increasingly echoed in other activists' groups. We are looking to organise our planned autumn conference jointly with other groups.

4. Together for the Charter - New Online Campaign to call for BBC Accountability

A new initiative Together For The Charter is being launched in the form of an online public petition calling for the BBC to be governed in accordance with the democratic and accountable ideals of its royal charter. The campaign website is under construction at this address:

http://bbccharter.co.uk/main/BBC_Home.html

This is an initiative to bring together a range of groups challenging the BBC. The petition will go live later in February. When ten more significant allies are committed to the Declaration a wider launch programme will be undertaken. The goals of the campaign include

* publicising the growing list of significant complainants with documented challenges to BBC disinformation.

* to provide a petition facility, ongoing and ever growing until the Corporation is brought to account by collective public will.

* to open out the growing debate about how concerned citizens can make the BBC accountable to its Royal Charter

Watch this space for more information


Best wishes

Ian, Fran, Rob, Noel, Roy, James, Jay, Ted, Sheila, Mykal and all at Reinvestigate 911 and Accountable Democracy

[TonyGosling]

Historic court case against the BBC's cover up of 9/11 evidence

Dear UK AE911Truth petition signers

The BBC is being challenged strongly for its refusal to present to the British public the available scientific evidence which contradicts the official version of events of 9/11. Thank you very much to all those who have sent letters to their MPs asking that the BBC be held to account for withholding this evidence that the public must be allowed to see.

As a further progression of this campaign, a great opportunity has arisen. 9/11 truth documentary maker Tony Rooke has been granted a court hearing where he is challenging the BBC's support of terrorist activity through supporting the cover up of the true evidence of 9/11. The court case will take place on February 25th at 10.00am at the address below. Real 9/11 evidence has rarely, if ever, been presented in a British court room, so this is a rare opportunity. Any support from the public on the day would be fantastic and will help to send the message that the people want to know, and deserve to know, the truth about 9/11.

Horsham Magistrates’ Court [Court 3]
The Law Courts
Hurst Road
Horsham
West Sussex
England
RH12 2ET

This court case is based around Tony making a stand and refusing to pay his TV licence fee under Section 15 of The Terrorism Act 2000 Article 3 which 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. The BBC has withheld scientific evidence which clearly demonstrates that the official version of events of 9/11 is not possible and could not have been carried out in entirety by those who have been accused by our officials. In addition, the BBC has actively blocked and smeared those attempting to bring this evidence to the public. By doing this the BBC are supporting a cover-up of the true events of 9/11 and are therefore supporting those terrorist elements who were involved in certain aspects of 9/11 who have not yet been identified and held to account. A new and independent investigation is required to determine what really did occur on 9/11, and by whom, otherwise these unidentified terrorist elements will remain free to potentially commit further terrorist activities.


Tony has been charged with a crime for not paying his TV licence fee, however, he has lodged a legal challenge to this charge and has now been successful in being granted an appearance in a Magistrate’s court where he has three hours available to present his evidence to defend himself against the charge. Tony has formed a formidable team to support him in presenting the evidence, including the following two outstanding individuals:

Professor Niels Harrit
Niels Harrit is a Professor of Chemistry at the University of Copenhagen and is one of the world’s leading experts on the scientific evidence which contradicts the official story of 9/11. Professor Harrit's team of scientists proved that there was nano-thermite residue (high tech military explosive) all through the dust of all three towers and he got this study peer reviewed and published in an official scientific journal. He is also an expert on the other aspects of scientific evidence indicating controlled demolition of the three towers. He was involved in a major interview with the BBC in 2011 where the BBC clearly attempted to harass and discredit Professor Harrit rather than look at the devastating scientific evidence he had to offer. Professor Harrit's team have video footage of this harassment and highly inappropriate conduct by the BBC both on camera and off camera as part of that interview.

Tony Farrell
Tony Farrell is a former Intelligence Analyst for South Yorkshire Police Department. In 2010 he was fired because he felt compelled by his conscience to tell the truth in his official report and state that due to his extensive analysis of 9/11 and the 7/7 London bombings, the greatest terrorist threat to the public did not come from Islamic extremists but from internal sources within the US and British establishment. He is now dedicating his life to helping to expose the truth and he is challenging his dismissal through international court. Tony Rooke has recently produced an excellent documentary called ‘Offensive - the story of Tony Farrell’ based around the story of Tony Farrell. Here is the link to that documentary http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P0oBseWMRQ&feature=player_embedded .


In addition, here is the other documentary that Tony has recently produced called ‘Reasonable Cause’ which gives a good insight into the type of work that Tony has been engaged in and the type of information and evidence that he will be presenting at his court case http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_AQMxvqWho .

Other members of Tony’s presentation team include:



Ian Henshall: Leading UK author on 9/11 and founder of the UK based group 'Reinvestigate9/11'

Ray Savage: Former Counter Terrorism Officer who believes the official 9/11 story is not reasonable to believe

As well as these presenters there are detailed written testimonies of evidence and support from our four other 9/11 experts:

Richard Gage: CEO of 'Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth'
Dwain Deets: Former NASA Director of Aerospace Projects
Erik Lawyer: Founder of 'Fire Fighters for 9/11 Truth'
Jake Jacobs: Veteran US airline pilot & member of 'Pilots for 9/11 Truth'

Please consider attending this historic court case to support Tony in this rare opportunity to have some of the true facts of 9/11 presented in a court of law and to have the BBC held to account for their support of the cover up of the true scientific evidence of 9/11.

Many thanks
AE911Truth -UK Action Group - on behalf of Tony Rooke

[outsider]

Trust people are aware by now that the Court has said there are no places for the public to attend:

Here is an email I received:


I have just telephoned Brighton Mags. Ct. (01273-811625/811648) who now do the admin for Horsham Mags. Ct. to ask how many spaces there are in the public gallery in Court 3 at Horsham. I told them why and exactly what case it was in reference to, but before giving all the details, I was told there are no seats for public in court 3.

I wonder why Tony's case has been listed for court 3!!!

Initially, before the woman put me on hold to find out the information I was asking for, I explained that there was a case listed for court 3 that I would like to attend and I expected that there would be quite a few people who would want to go. She asked me, "How many?" I said I had no idea but it could be quite a lot.

When she returned to me she told me that although there are no public seats in court 3, there are about 25 seats in the public gallery in courts 1 and 2.

I then told her exactly which case it was in reference to, then summarised the case and why I thought there would be a lot of public interest. I said that I would "talk to my sources" to get an estimate of the numbers likely to want to be there and we might write to the court asking them to re-list the case for one of the other courtrooms. She gave me the address to write to.

I have posted on lunatic outpost, where I have found (a copy of?) the original article came, asking for anyone who intends to go to signify on that forum topic thread.

If by any chance, you are in direct contact with Tony Rooke. If so please forward my e-mail to him. I have not been able to find an e-mail address for him.

H.

[fish5133]

Dont think he will win his case because the link between BBC withholding evidence and "terrorists" is too spurious. And i cant see how a judge could rule that Licence monies would aid and abet events from the past However the evidence presented should be good.

[TonyGosling]

had a good chat with Martin from R911 on Friday about this case
A round up of the weeks international news with Martin Summers. a court case about 9/11 is coming in Horsham, Sussex on Monday 25th February where Anthony Rooke of Christians for 9/11 Truth is suing the BBC for aiding and abetting terrorism under Section 15 Article 3 of the Terrorism Act 2000; North Korea conducts underground nuclear test this week so where did they get their nuclear weapons? Could it be lost plutonium or enriched uranium or even complete warheads from Russia or the NATO countries? http://bcfm.org.uk/2013/02/15/17/friday-drivetime-109/27066
http://www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/66272

[outsider]

[Andrew.]

[quote
http://www.blacklistednews.com/The_911_Truth_Movement_Goes_to_Court_in _the_UK/24303/0/0/0/Y/M.html

The 911 Truth Movement Goes to Court in the UK
February 18, 2013
Print Version

Source: Global Research
911TRUTH3

On February 25, in the small town of Horsham in the United Kingdom, there will be a rare and potentially groundbreaking opportunity for the 9/11 truth movement. Three hours of detailed 9/11 evidence is to be presented and considered in a court of law where the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) will be challenged over the inaccurate and biased manner in which it has portrayed the events and evidence of 9/11.

Over the last 16 months, BBC has been challenged strongly by individuals in the UK over two documentaries that they showed in September 2011 as part of the tenth anniversary of 9/11, namely ‘9/11: Conspiracy Road Trip’ and ‘The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 Ten Years On’. Formal complaintswere lodged with BBC over the inaccuracy and bias of these documentaries, which, according to 9/11 activists, was in breach of the operating requirements of BBC through their ‘Royal Charter and Agreement’ with the British public.

This document requires BBC to show information that is both accurate and impartial. These complaints were supported by the US-based educational charity Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth), which submitted detailed scientific evidence to BBC to buttress the complaints. The evidence focuses in particular on the confirmed free-fall of WTC 7 and NIST’s 2008 admission of this fact. In addition, over 300 AE911Truth petition signers supported these complaints by sending letters to BBC, requesting that BBC show this evidence to the public.

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.

Rooke has been charged with a crime for not paying his TV Licence Fee. However, he has lodged a legal challenge to this charge and has now been successful in being granted an appearance in a Magistrate’s court, where he has three hours available to present his evidence to defend himself against the charge. Tony has put together a formidable team to support him in presenting the evidence, including the following two outstanding 9/11 researchers:

Professor Niels Harrit
P

Dr. Niels Harrit is a Professor of Chemistry at the University of Copenhagen and is one of the world’s leading experts on the scientific evidence that contradicts the official story of 9/11. Professor Harrit’s team of scientists in Copenhagen proved that there was nano-engineered thermitic residue, both ignited and unignited, throughout the dust of the three WTC towers. He led the team and published the peer-reviewed study in an official scientific journal. He is also an expert on the other aspects of scientific evidence indicating controlled demolition of the three towers.

Professor Harrit was interviewed for a major documentary with BBC in 2011 where BBC clearly attempted to harass and discredit him rather than look at the scientific evidence, which was devastating to the official story of the destruction of the Twin Towers. Professor Harrit’s team took the precautionary step of recording this interview, as well as the interaction before and after the interview, which clearly shows the harassment and highly inappropriate conduct by BBC

Tony Farrell


Tony Farrell is a former Intelligence Analyst for the South Yorkshire Police Department. He was fired in 2010 because he felt compelled by his conscience to tell the truth in his official report and state that, due to his extensive analysis of the events of 9/11 and the 7/7 London bombings, he considered that the greatest terrorist threat to the public did not come from Islamic extremists but from internal sources within the US and British establishment. He is now dedicating his life to helping to expose the evidence and he is challenging his dismissal through international court.

Other members of Rooke’s presentation team include:

Ian Henshall: Leading UK author on 9/11 and founder of the UK group ‘Re-investigate 9/11’

Ray Savage: Former counterterrorism officer who demonstrates the official 9/11 story is not true

Peter Drew: UK AE911Truth Action Group Facilitator

In addition to these presenters, there are detailed written testimonies of evidence and support from four other 9/11 researchers which will be deployed to bolster to Tony’s defence:

Richard Gage, AIA: Founder/CEO of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
Dwain Deets: Former NASA Director of Aerospace Projects
Erik Lawyer: Founder of Firefighters for 9/11 Truth
Jake Jacobs: Veteran US airline pilot and member of Pilots for 9/11 Truth

The evidence about 9/11 that will be presented by the various individuals above has rarely, if ever, been seen in any court of law in the United Kingdom, so this court case represents a unique and valuable opportunity for the 9/11 Truth movement.

We encourage all AE911Truth supporters and petition signers in the UK to attend this court hearing – the more the better. An outpouring of support will strengthen the message that the 9/11 truth movement needs to be heard and that there needs to be a new and independent 9/11 investigation.

The date and location of the hearing are as follows:

February 25th at 10:00 am

Horsham Magistrates’ Court [Court 3]
The Law Courts
Hurst Road
Horsham
West Sussex
England
RH12 2ET

For further information, please contact Peter Drew, AE911Truth UK Action Group Leader, attruthfor911 [at] hotmail.co.uk[/quote]

[fish5133]

[outsider]

[Andrew.]

[outsider]

@ outsider:
'It will still be a miracle if he wins, but being Christians, what less can we expect?'

I am of course aware that not all readers are Christians; that was a tongue-in-cheek response to Fish 5133.

[Andrew.]

[TorsteinViddal]

[TorsteinViddal]

I'm on the 7.11 Horsham service train.

[scienceplease 2]

15 seconds (!) of video here...

http://www.westsussextoday.co.uk/news/county-news/video-9-11-truth-mov ement-in-horsham-1-4825268

So any real news?

[TorsteinViddal]

Link



Link
(Danish)


Link

[scienceplease 2]

Sorry Torstien, you'll need to change all the URL's none of them work.

(Ok, now they do). Tony Farrell's interview was very good. I'm sure Neil Harrit's will be good too once the there's a translation...

[outsider]

[scienceplease 2]

Sure. They work now!

The Daily Mail has pounced on this story as an anti-licence-fee story...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2284337/TV-licence-evader-refu sed-pay-BBC-covered-facts-9-11.html

Mail says

[outsider]

[TonyGosling]

Moral Victory for Protestor who says BBC 9/11 Coverage was False
http://www.reinvestigate911.org/content/court-victory-protestor

Campaigner and film maker Tony Rooke claimed a moral victory today after a UK court gave him a conditional discharge even though he has refused to pay his BBC license fee. Over 100 supporters from as far away as Denmark and Norway cheered in front of the court house as independent media people conducted interviews and photographed the crowd. Court officials had booked their largest room for the case but were at a loss to find that well over 50 people could not be fitted in.

Tony said: "I am taken a back and hugely grateful for all the support." He is asking for at least one person to take up the campaign by refusing to pay or taking other legal action (see below).

Rooke argued that the BBC's coverage of the 9/11 terror attacks in New York has been so distorted that it amounts to giving aid and comfort to the unidentified terrorists who demolished three World Trade Centre buildings in 2001. Two hijacked planes were flown into the famous Twin Towers and a third tower WTC7 collapsed later in the day. The attacks were used as the pretext for a decade of wars and the introduction of police state measures across the NATO countries. Vast personal fortunes were made by White House and CIA officials who failed to thwart 9/11.

The official 9/11 story was promulgated by the US media within minutes of the first collision, based on anonymous sources in the Bush White House. Despite a mass of new evidence coming to light in the intervening years the story has never changed and holds that the destruction was entirely caused by a band of Muslim fanatics, they succeeded without any help, and were organised by the notorious Osama Bin Laden who it is admitted was once a CIA agent. A man described as Osama Bin Laden was captured, assassinated and deposited in the ocean by US forces in Pakistan two years ago.

Sceptics say that the collapse of WTC7 must have been the result of something more than limited fires and damage from the Twin Towers, hit by the two hijacked planes. Argument has revolved around the speed of the collapse. In the BBC Conspiracy Files series, which endorsed every aspect of the official 9/11 story, it was stated that the building did not collapse at free fall speed, but later US officials were forced by video evidence to admit that it did just that.

A large group of over 1500 architects and engineers known as AE911 say that free fall collapse implies that the building had all its supports removed at the same instant which can only happen with a controlled demolition. Tony Rooke's legal argument is that in failing to correct their free fall misinformation and many other misstatements of fact, the BBC are a party to covering up the terrorists who organised the controlled demolition of WTC7.

The BBC has also failed to publicise the finding of Richard Clarke, head of counter terrorism at the White House in 2001. Two years ago Clarke made a bombshell announcement: in the weeks before 9/11 a secret "decision" must have been taken at the CIA to over rule FBI officers who wanted to arrest some of the people who according to the official story went on to commit the attacks. Clarke says that if this decision had not been made the 9/11 attacks would not have happened. Before Clarke went public the BBC programme makers were adamant this was a "conspiracy theory". Afterwards they failed to give it any prominence and failed to reinterview any of the officials who, if Clarke is right, must have lied to them.

Back in Horsham Magistrates Court campaigners have been planning future tactics. Tony Rook's victory, helped by lawyer Mahtab Aziz, implies that the BBC has a case to answer, but expert witnesses including Danish associate professor Niels Harrit were not called due to legal technicalities. However the District Judge would have read their statements before the hearing and taken them into account.

Conditional discharges are often used in political cases to indicate that the accused, though technically guilty, occupies the moral high ground. In addition the case provides a yardstick that can be raised by future campaigners. On the other hand because he has not been convicted, Tony cannot appeal and force the courts to scrutinise the highly questionable activities of the BBC as a conduit for CIA propaganda.

It's now essential for Tony's campaign that at least one person should take up the baton, refuse to pay their licence fee and appeal any conviction. Anyone interested should contact him at
rookietone@hotmail.com

Story by Ian Henshall, Reinvestigate 911





Reinvestigate 9/11
www.reinvestigate911.org
info@reinvestigate911.org
http://www.youtube.com/user/reinvestigate911org


We will support any new investigation of the 9/11 attacks so long as
*it is run by uncompromised people with a range of opinion including those inclined to disbelieve the official 9/11 story,
*it follows the evidence wherever it leads
if it takes place in the US to be credible it will need
*full legal authority to demand immediate access to any evidence and any witness it chooses
*the resources it requires to carry out its investigation

[Andrew.]

[TonyGosling]

A bit late but...
Did Tony know he could request the case be heard in the crown court?

[Andrew.]

[TorsteinViddal]

Continued from the following pre-case topic - ed.
9/11 Court Case Before a Judge at Horsham Monday 25 Feb
http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=21758


The Greatest News Story Ever Told: BBC On Trial

BBC ON TRIAL: I spoke to the man outside the Station pub in Horsham, West Sussex, just hours before he wrote the greatest news story ever told, which, ironically, is also exactly why it's not headline news in any of the mainstream media in our vastly US-directed Nordic countries; neither in England, Scotland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark or Finland.

Ian Henshall - a measured and careful pro-democracy activist, if ever there was one - hits the nail on its head with his after-court report, which he brilliantly puts in its right context, which makes this the greatest and most important news story in our time (read on).

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

Daily Mail edited the story and headline at 07:37 this morning... wonder what the exact edits were?

[fish5133]

nice banner

[scienceplease 2]

[TorsteinViddal]

"Pete" from Cardiff wrote

[TorsteinViddal]

Nice outcome, if true: