Breaking news - 9/11, 7/7, False Flag terrorism, Psyops against ordinary people/political classes and War on Freedom by Private Military companies and the mainstream media - current affairs.
Charlie Veitch is a plant along with his new promoter Alex Jones...get with it people...
Is it any wonder nothing changes you are all so easily fooled into following an Intelligence script. The truth movement is dead because you deal in garbage and remove the truth.
You cannot be arrested for nuisance unless of course you identify yourself as a commercial debt account, he does in order you will too...
Speaking of the royal wedding, I noted the chemtrails stopped some weeks before it and hey presto we have sunny weather, today Wednesday 4 May the chemtrails are back with a vengeance, now call me old fashioned but the weather will change from today...
Ensuring the black sun god has a sunny day for his sham wedding to a commoner....wow she is one of us so we love William and the evil can remain sat atop our constitution.....
Life wrote:Charlie Veitch is a plant along with his new promoter Alex Jones...get with it people...
Is it any wonder nothing changes you are all so easily fooled into following an Intelligence script. The truth movement is dead because you deal in garbage and remove the truth.
You cannot be arrested for nuisance unless of course you identify yourself as a commercial debt account, he does in order you will too...
Speaking of the royal wedding, I noted the chemtrails stopped some weeks before it and hey presto we have sunny weather, today Wednesday 4 May the chemtrails are back with a vengeance, now call me old fashioned but the weather will change from today...
Ensuring the black sun god has a sunny day for his sham wedding to a commoner....wow she is one of us so we love William and the evil can remain sat atop our constitution.....
I can't see on this thread that anyone supports all that he Charlie Veitch says, but he has the right to protest and it was unlawful to arrest him on his thought of and/or protest that may have followed.
I'm not impressed with Vietch in BBC3's "9/11 Conspiracy Trip"...
What a surprise: the whole program was rigged... no mention of the strongest physical evidence (WTC7, molten metal and freefall) and concentrated on the weakest. Of course we don't "KNOW" what happened at the Pentagon or UA93 - there is no air crash investigation!
Uploaded by nickachief on 11 Sep 2011
i was with this lady as was charlie on september 11th 2009, she was nice then as she was today (september 11th 2011) .... in my opinion charlie was out of order, what say you ? thumb up for yes .... & tune it to resistance radio @ resistradio.com
CHARLIE VEITCH CALLS CAMPAIGNER BELINDA MCKENZIE A BITCH crookreport.co.uk
Has anyone got any hard evidence that Charlie Veitch was ever sceptical about the official 9/11 conspiracy theory? I have seen plenty of amusing and clever videos of him with his bullhorn, but no written or spoken record of him doubting or questioning the official conspiracy theory. Without that evidence it is not unreasonable to conclude that he has not changed his mind about 9/11 at all and people may be being duped into thinking he has by some clever disinformation.
Contrast this probably truthful account by Emily Church, one of those young people who accompanied Charlie on his Conspiracy Roadtrip to the States.
She skillfully exposes the propagandistic nature of the trip.
“9/11 Conspiracy Roadtrip” – A Participant’s Perspective [/b]September 8, 2011
Author: Emily Louise Church
Source: 9/11 Truth News
Hello, my name is Emily Church and I am a mute.
Well, according to the masters of propaganda at the BBC/Renegade Productions.
This summer I participated in a BBC hit piece on 9/11, entitled “Conspiracy Roadtrip”. The premise is simple: five non-believers of the official story journey across the east coast of the USA in search of the truth. On the way we meet “experts” and victims of the attacks, guided by “comedian” Andrew Maxwell who believes the 9/11 commission report was the be all and end all of the 9/11 story.
The show aired a few hours ago and I felt compelled to write my version of what happened on that 8 day roadtrip, to give you the perspective you were not shown by BBC 3.
Firstly, I must tip my hat to them. They did a wonderful editing job. Anyone who has ever had a conversation with me or knows me personally will be very much aware of my opinions re: 9/11, and how outspoken I am about them. However, on this show I appear to be pretty much silent the entire way through.
I wasn’t.
Throughout my time on the show I asked question after question. I asked every single person we met whether they believed the official story to be true and the vast majority of them said no. Ask yourselves this question: why has the footage of us meeting Tom Owen, a voice analyst who worked on the Osama Bin Laden “confession” tapes, been cut completely? There is a simple answer. Because he told us not to believe the official report. Why? Because we aren’t in the “need-to-know” category, his words, not mine. Throughout our entire meeting with Tom Owen it was pretty much clear that the director of the show wasn’t happy with his take. Like most of our meetings with “experts” she would try and steer the conversation in a direction that would better fit her hit piece.
I’d also like to ask why footage of [FAA National Operations Manager] Ben Sliney saying that someone needs to be held accountable for 9/11 was cut? Surely that’s something that the TV license paying public should be able to see? But no, it didn’t fit their requirements for the perfect hit piece.
On the journey I was one of the most vocal contributors, consistently asking questions and receiving no answers whatsoever. I wonder why? Is it completely out of this world to assume that the answers to my questions might have made the truth about 9/11 a little too clear to the viewer? Is it a ridiculous conspiracy theory to assume that the reason the BBC turned me into a mute was to create a biased hit-piece? As with most 9/11 “conspiracy” documentaries, they focused on mostly debunkable theories such as no plane hit the Pentagon and fake phone calls. In other words, * that pushes us further away from real truth and accountability. They also did a great job at making it seem like I believed most of these theories. I’ll freely admit that before I went on the show I was a “9/11 was an inside job” sort of girl. Hell, I even have a t-shirt from infowars.com. Yes that’s right, I knowingly gave money to Alex Jones.
Before I went on the show I had an epiphany of sorts. I realized that all evidence points to a plane hitting a Pentagon, that maybe the twin towers and Building 7 weren’t a controlled demolition and maybe Dick Cheney and co hadn’t plotted the whole thing with fake hijackers. Now I don’t know what is true and what isn’t. I am not 100% convinced about controlled demolition but it is a distinct possibility. I just decided to focus on the other, less spoken about side of 9/11. The fact that with multiple warnings, the US failed to prevent an attack on their own shores. The fact that so many people have been gagged from talking about 9/11 and revealing information they might know. The fact that the 9/11 commission report, by it’s own ADMISSION was set up to fail. These are just a few of the facts that I brought up on the show. Were they shown? No.
I made it very clear, before I went to the US, that I thought these theories can sometimes be harmful to our chances of ever getting a new investigation into 9/11. I asked repeatedly to speak to some sort of government representative, someone who I could ask my questions to. And despite being told I would get to speak to someone, alas that time never came.
So tonight I watched the show and saw no effort on the BBC’s part to differentiate myself from these theories. In fact, they made it look like these theories were actually my own. As you will see if you watch the show, they told me to ask about airport security, yet they cut out clips of me asking why the hijackers weren’t prevented from entering the country. I asked why, with all of the foreknowledge that the US had, were precautions not taken to protect the innocent American people that tragically lost their lives. I didn’t get an answer.
In ten years, not one person has been held accountable for the events of 9/11, when it is now so evident that the attacks could have been prevented. Hell, even Ben Sliney said that the attacks could’ve been prevented. Why are we so comfortable with letting people get away with this? And why, after ten years, are people that dare to question the official story still painted as conspiracy theorists? Hasn’t it been proven, time and time again, that elements of the US administration covered up their criminal involvement in 9/11?
Interestingly, the whole show seemed to be centered around Charlotte, trying to portray her as something she isn’t. The editing was truly phenomenal. Here we have a typical conspiracy theorist, unwilling to listen to anyone else’s point of view and adamant that she is right. That’s not how it was. They also included an argument that Charlotte and I had and took it completely out of context. They failed to include the fact that we made up shortly afterwards, with me apologizing to her. It made me quite angry to see vicious comments about her, considering the fact that she is a friend of mine and one of the people I have stayed in most contact with after the show. Yes, I may disagree with her on some points, but that is the great thing about being able to formulate our own opinions. Charlotte and I are united on the fact that 9/11 desperately needs a new investigation. Please don’t fall for the BBC’s clever editing trick, she is not a bad person and the show misrepresented her entirely.
The same goes for Rodney, the other person I have stayed in contact with since being in the US. Again, we may not agree on everything and we have our differences, but in my experience with him he is a rational and down to earth person. Maybe we should all remember that this was a well-crafted hit piece and the editing was designed to generate ill-feeling towards Rodney and Charlotte, the most head-strong people on the show (along with myself, obviously).
And here we reach Andrew Maxwell, the Irish comedian who consistently ridiculed us and walked away in the middle of debates. See, the BBC don’t want you to know that he complained throughout the entire shoot, laughed about us behind our backs and on more than one occasion said that he wished he’d never signed on to do the show. He’s not a bad person. He was there trying to make some money, we were there trying to get some truth. It’s as simple as that.
Personally, I’m disgusted at the documentary and I think participating in the show will always be one of my biggest regrets. But at the same time, I feel pretty lucky that I got to meet the people I did and ask the questions that I did, even though they weren’t included in the show. It saddens me that I look like a dumb student who doesn’t know a thing about 9/11 and it angers me that I barely have a voice in the entire 60 minutes that the show runs for.
Overall the experience was an interesting one, but one I wouldn’t do again. Imagine intense heat, stuck on a bus all day with cameras shoved in your face, 12 hour filming days, early mornings and emotional breakdowns. It was intense to say the least.
There are a lot more grievances I have with the show but that’s something I will write about another day. Now, it’s time to get some sleep and try to find hope in the fact that I know what happened on the 9/11 Conspiracy Road Trip, I know what I said and I know the answers I got.
Here's the so-called 'Love Police' Canary Wharf video; infiltrator Veitch shows his true colours below, and in the supposed 'volte face' re 9/11 in the BBC 'Conspiracy Road Show'; Veitch shows his 'Loving Nature' by calling a tireless, marvellous lady campaigner for extremely worthy causes, such as 9/11 Truth and justice for abused children a 'bitch'; but then what can one expect from such a low-life infiltrator?
I doubt Veitch's paymasters or BBC junket providers are very pleased with the vile, hateful outburst; after all, kinda blots the copy-book, what? Veitch's ability to lead people up the garden path of pro-NWO propaganda has, hopefully, been seriously eroded.
Belinda, look on the bright side! The only one bellitled by Veitch was the jerk himself, and by implication his psychopathic NWO paymasters.
'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
I wonder if his new camera people and comrades are actually intelligence or something? I watched his latest upload and it shows him as quite idiotic, it also shows one of his comrades laughing and joking at him being the new Messiah before bending down and kissing his feet! Maybe he truly is running scared
Disco_Destroyer wrote:I wonder if his new camera people and comrades are actually intelligence or something? I watched his latest upload and it shows him as quite idiotic, it also shows one of his comrades laughing and joking at him being the new Messiah before bending down and kissing his feet! Maybe he truly is running scared
In fact even the opening he doesn't look that comfortable!
Up that Creek without a Paddle springs to mind
I can't see how you can't see the military profile of the 'revellers' that join in 'it's' (what does one call a creature that has taken the 'thirty pieces of silver'?) shenanigans.
'It' doesn't seem to be in any sort of trouble; I suspect we'll see and hear a lot more of 'it' and it's ilk.
Of course 'it's' accomplices are in on the scam.
State organised disinfo and disruption.
Doesn't cost a lot to get some squaddies and their bints to have a controlled drunken rave.
'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
xmasdale wrote:Does anyone know how to contact Emily Louise Church? She is reportedly on Facebook but I can't find her there and also reportedly on Linked In.
I've deleted this post, because I realize it could easily have been construed as an attack against Emily Church, whereas I had meant it to be a warning against Gareth, who I suspect of being a plant.
Last edited by outsider on Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
xmasdale wrote:Does anyone know how to contact Emily Louise Church? She is reportedly on Facebook but I can't find her there and also reportedly on Linked In.
Gareth is considered by a number of 9/11 campaigners, including myself, of being a plant. There is a thread on this, I'll try to dig it up another time, because I have to get to sleep, up early in the morning.
'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
outsider wrote:I've deleted this post, because I realize it could easily have been construed as an attack against Emily Church, whereas I had meant it to be a warning against Gareth, who I suspect of being a plant.
Just re-organising my post. I obviously gave the wrong impression that I was doubting Emily's excellent report, when in fact the mention of Gareth triggered an unthinking warning reaction from me.
I hope Emily's report can be used to get some sort of 'right of reply' or something to the BBC travesty.
'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
music: Moderat - Porc#2 and Bare Noize - Make Some Noize
Cheers, D_D
Unfortunately, I arrived a little after this episode, but still in enough time to have Belinda tell me the jerk had called her a 'bitch'. She was obviously upset, but I told her this was a good situation, that the infiltrator Veitch had made a 'Big Mistake' (not in so many words, but in essence).
I asked B for the magaphone, and reffered to the jerk as a MI5 plant; oddly enough, the jerk did not reply, and shortly after slunk away, tail between it's legs, without another word on it's megaphone.
'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
outsider wrote:I've deleted this post, because I realize it could easily have been construed as an attack against Emily Church, whereas I had meant it to be a warning against Gareth, who I suspect of being a plant.
Just re-organising my post. I obviously gave the wrong impression that I was doubting Emily's excellent report, when in fact the mention of Gareth triggered an unthinking warning reaction from me.
I hope Emily's report can be used to get some sort of 'right of reply' or something to the BBC travesty.
I know I sound subjective but I have personally known Gareth since 2007 when William Rodriguez did his UK tour. The evidence for what you are suggesting is extremely weak IMO.
outsider wrote:I've deleted this post, because I realize it could easily have been construed as an attack against Emily Church, whereas I had meant it to be a warning against Gareth, who I suspect of being a plant.
Just re-organising my post. I obviously gave the wrong impression that I was doubting Emily's excellent report, when in fact the mention of Gareth triggered an unthinking warning reaction from me.
I hope Emily's report can be used to get some sort of 'right of reply' or something to the BBC travesty.
I know I sound subjective but I have personally known Gareth since 2007 when William Rodriguez did his UK tour. The evidence for what you are suggesting is extremely weak IMO.
I was at a demo opposite the Israeli Embassy some while back; Gareth was there, we were practically next to each other a number of times, and neither of us acknowledged the other.
Gareth helped a young Asian (I think Indian) woman to climb some kind of structure next to the wall, and behind me, so that she would have a better view (she was taking pictures).
I then saw him looking at her, and I believe indicating me with a slight finger motion. Not that I need to worry; the 'Authorities' have a file a yard thick on me, with all kinds of photos.
Of course, I could be mistaken.
'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
David Rose wrote:Jazds, you are not a very intelligent person. Why do you want to attack someone who gets out there and does something? You carry on. Just sit in front of your computer being negative and doing nothing. How sad.
Because I don't believe Charlie Veitch is doing anything, other than pissing people off and causing a distraction - for whatever reason.
Rather than calling me stupid, perhaps you could address some of the points I raised above, David.
Well said, 'jazds'!!
Looks like you figured Veitch out pretty early, and pretty well!!!
'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
