In Part 1 we acknowledged there is a global push to censor public opinion, curtail investigative journalism and thereby effectively end freedom of speech for everyone.
This is my reply to Brian Gerrish from UK Column. For some reason I cannot reply to him directly. Apologies to all and Brian in particular.
**********************************
Thanks for replying Brian. I will assume you represent UK Column in my reply.
I don't think it is reasonable for you to describe the argument I have presented as a "hit piece." Sorry you feel that way. I have no idea what "other" hit pieces you believe I've written.
When I published my book I sent copies to all independent media outlets, inviting criticisms or commentary. Of course this was a promotional effort. I have never sent you anything else . So whoever sent you "pages and pages" of my work, it wasn't me.
I do not speak for Richard D. Hall but I do not think the Manchester bombing is the most important thing in the world. I do think the evidence presented is unprecedented and unlike anything we have ever seen with regard to a state orchestrated false flag attack.
The point I have tried to make is not that Manchester itself is the worst crime the state has ever committed but that the evidence is so clear and easy to package as a news report that it presents all of us who oppose the unfolding tyranny a unique opportunity to show our fellow citizens the nature of the state and illustrate to them why we should all oppose its criminal excesses. That is why, in these articles and the accompanying video, I suggest focusing upon the evidence instead of engaging in divisive, speculative allegations. As you said Brian, "it helps nobody."
Clearly you are not convinced by this argument and UK Column do not wish to report this evidence. Of course, that is entirely your choice. I was trying to encourage you to report the evidence but I never assumed I had any right to demand it of you. I note, further down this comment section, you suggests I could have called you and encouraged you that way. Brian, I was fully aware a number of people were asking you to show the Manchester evidence. My articles and video was intended to add to those calls. I do not think you can claim no one was making them.
I accept that UK Column does not want to report the Manchester evidence, while I think this is a huge opportunity missed, there is no more I can say and I won't press the matter any further.
But you have now at least commented on the evidence and I assume this largely reflects UK Column's reason for not reporting it. You wrote that you were not convinced by all of my rather wordy comment and analysis. Fair enough Brian. So what is your analysis of the evidence?
For example, what is your analysis of the fact that the observable physical evidence shows that there was no structural damage inside the City Room just minutes after a huge TATP shrapnel bomb supposedly exploded in it?
I think that's probably correct, but if that is indeed their position they should be honest with their audience and not maintain that they have supported RDH thoughout.
To be fair to Brian, I think UKC has been pretty good in keeping its audience abreast of developments in Hall's ongoing legal debacle.
And the UKC team as a whole are entitled not to venture any opinions on Hall's case that they consider too far beyond their remit. That's a straightforward editorial decision, the likes of which could be found in any news media outlet.
That aside, where Brian seems to be out of his depth is revealed in the nature of his response to Iain's perfectly reasonable questions in this very forum.
Having put himself on the hook, Brian would be well advised to offer some form of direct answer to these questions, or he'll risk damaging not only his journalistic integrity, but the Column's as well.
On a personal note, I've been a paid subscriber to UKC for many years. I have found great comfort and illumination in their work, particularly during the COVID fraud.
I've stopped watching Monday's broadcast, however, because I find that combination of presenters lacks the weight, polish and incisiveness I've come to expect from the Column as a brand. Most notably, much as I admire him as a man, I don't think Mr Gerrish is a good choice for anchor, anymore.
In not explaining to their audience that the Manchester Arena event was a hoax used to justify air attacks on Libya - which resulted in the deaths of innocent people - they have effectively protected the perpetrators who will no doubt use the tactic of false flag fake terror in the future to justify more military assaults on other innocent people. UKC is the biggest and most well resourced independent media outlet in the UK, if they had clearly reported Manchester as a hoax some in the msm would have felt compelled to at least acknowledge Hall's evidence, but UKC have effectively supressed this evidence and have not even described what it is let alone shown it. If they had broadcast Hall's evidence to their sizeable audience those responsible for perpetrating these hoaxes would perhaps have thought twice next time or at least been put under more pressure to resist the temptation to repeat this tactic. UKC know the truth and so must bear some responsibility when those powers which are ranged against us use the propaganda of 'terrorist attacks' as justification to kill more people in the future. The UKC Team will bear some of the blame for this and will in a moral sense have blood on their hands.
But UKC did direct those interested in Hall's case to his website.
I don't think they had any obligation to do more, frankly.
If people want to be spoon fed all their information, without doing even a modicum of work themselves, I'd say there is little prospect of any significant change for the better, however indictable the state is for its crimes.
I'd lean into this verdict instead of trying to fight it openly.
What they are basically saying is, "It's a heinous crime against human decency and privacy to film someone without their knowledge during the course of their day".
With this, we can then refocus their own rhetoric towards street cameras, traffic cameras, speed cameras, police body cams, dash cams, CCTV. The full blown surveillance state they are hypocritically operating.
Now one can only defend this by saying, "Ah, but this is all to protect people from crime and terrorism".
Then we ask was Hall not also filming people to protect people from crime and terrorism.
But, they say, the targets weren't committing a crime, so it's wrong. But then neither are the people in street and traffic footage.
And we have that either the government is committing a heinous crime on an industrial scale, or hall wasn't.
U seem to think the "state" has to follow the same rules/laws like a normal citizen. It is a romantic view . Sure u get lots of likes for it, but it is totally unrealistic .. For intel and milliary they can basically do what they want. If RDH thought he can "spy" on some girl cuz the "state" does it all day long to everyone, then he is stupid (if we assume this affairs is real at all, prob not :P)
Apparently, there are more CCTV's in Britain per capita than anywhere else in the world. Talk about the irony and rank hypocrisy of these chancers, it's breathtaking, LOL.
Yet when my friends phone gets nicked from behind the counter by a customer in his shop having both the cctv footage and the mans details because he paid card for something else the police don't want to know and he had to bring a private prosecution.
People don’t understand the real purpose of the police and courts., (privately owned entities and not public) is to uphold the powers of “the state” not to solve or prevent crime, or meet out justice.
The police are a criminal gang of Freemasons and thugs, maintaining control through Order ab Chao.
The police, courts and govts are all privately owned and incorporated entities, not public institutions. The public own no shares/stock of these corporate entities and can’t dissolve, restructure, reform or audit them.
The public aren’t even aware the entire legal system isn’t lawful (including common law which is derived from canon law - the Vatican) reducing status of free men and women to that of legal fiction, slaves owned by “the state”.
The “police” are involved in criminal fraud, organized crime, drug trafficking, human trafficking, prostitution, staging hoaxes and covering up state crimes.
Oh yes indeed Chunky, I agree with your sentiment.
There are drug dealers who all park up and congregate around a 24 hour shop a couple of miles from me. Virtually everyone who uses this shop, even occasionally, have no problem identifying the drug dealers. They often have issues amongst themselves. In the last few months, one had his hand chopped off and another was shot and badly injured. Yet the Police seem completely oblivious to all this shit that's going down right under their noses, bless.
Having said that, the drug dealers predominantly have protected characteristics, so it's only right and proper that they are afforded the opportunity to earn an easy, lucrative living, regardless of the consequences for society at large.
And heaven forbid we call them out for their crimes and kick up a stink. I mean, who could possibly live down the shame of being accused of discriminatory behaviour against the disadvantaged?
''Yet the Police seem completely oblivious to all this shit that's going down right under their noses, bless.''
Dave, brother of Maxine the serial abuser ? Is a child in sheltered uppity middle class delusions ! Dave is so unaware of how world around him functions that he always appear an opinionated idiot whatever he discuss!
It is quite incredible!
Here Dave is utterly clueless how Police facilitate & even supply local vice networks. 🙄😂😆😂
Well, all I can say is that I'm simply in awe of your almost occult like knowledge and simply breathtaking insights into what's going on behind the curtain, the kind of stuff us sheeple can't even begin to comprehend!
If you had a better understanding of English, you would have known in what context the word bless was used at the end of the sentence about the Police. It can be a very nuanced language, English. So because English is not be your native language, I infer no criticism here.
Maybe she is a CCP bot, but as the nuance really did go over her head and create a troll. Sad.
Love your description of protected characteristics. That's exactly why those sex gangs continued for so long, still exist in parts unchallenged and why Hue Edwards isn't in prison. With the sex gangs they like to claim it was a minority element of the community but given the amount those girls were thrown around it was most likely a majority element of the community. They just don't care. Go to India, Pakistan or even Africa it's interesting how some people just don't know how to clean up after themselves.
Just tell your kids, friends and family in job applications to tick the other box for race and at least bi sexual for orientation. You can seriously game the system that way too and be a protected species. Funny though if we were to look at "the science" or more correctly maths the white man is the one dying out, but we can't talk about that because it's nazi like everything else.
This entire soap opera of a trial has alerted me to the distinct possibility of a major upcoming false flag event in the UK which must be believed or at least unquestioned.
The recent news that all the CCTV cameras in London have been turned off since September adds to my conviction that such an event will be forthcoming in the very near future.
Eve's Law will not stop me watching and waiting for the next instalment, delivered courtesy of British plotters and their undercover actors.
Some of the comments here are totally baffling and seem to missing the point. Let's all focus on the clear message in Iain's video which is about the need of the independent media to disseminate Richard Hall's evidence to their audiences, as well as examining the extent to which they have allowed the state's/msm's attempted character assassination of him to frame their own thinking and distract them from endorsing unequivocally the unassailable fact that the Manchester Arena event was a false flag HOAX.
Have you watched the videos of him converting his cheap home on a shoestring budget? Collecting rainwater, collecting free fire wood, trying to grow veg in a tiny back yard, etc etc? If Richard is anything other than what we see, he's certainly doing it for nowt as he's considerably poorer than I am.
He could have carried on earning relatively good money as an accomplished electronics engineer. He will now earn nothing pretty much after this lot!
She’s asking why apologists for Hall, Iain and this seemingly staged, hoax trial seem to be ignoring the obvious.
We aren’t privy to Hall’s financial status or his intentions.
But Hall implicated himself in unnecessary, alleged surveillance activity, whilst simultaneously establishing through hearsay the existence of “Eve” who appears to be a composite character, a fiction, a paste up and illusory. Which would make the entire trial a joke and con on Hall’s audience and others who know the Manchester Arena incident was a hoax and a drill. Right?
Consequently, Hall’s behavior is questionable at best and falls into line with many of the hoaxed trials we’ve seen play out in the alt and msm, including the Alex Jones fake trial, the Reiner Fuellmich fake trial, the CJ Hopkins fake trial, and many more.
I sigh as I read another Iain Davis hit piece on UKColumn, and me in person, because we have not covered the Manchester bombings in the way that Iain Davis sees fit. My goodness, a video to attack me this time. Perhaps I should feel honoured that I am the target of a substack video hit.
The real issue here is that to Richard D Hall and Iain, the Manchester bombings are the most important thing in the world. And both are entitled to think so. Iain is so deep into it that he has written a book and sent me pages and pages for me to read. Presumably so that I will be convinced that it should be my key priority. Unfortunately I was not convinced by all of his rather wordy comment and analysis, nor that the subject of the Manchester bombings should immediately be my key reporting priority.
But I respect Ian’s opinion and I certainly respect the work that Richard D Hall has done.
Over the years, my personal prority has been on different subjects. For example Common Purpose, Global governance, propaganda, mind control and its attack on society, and child stealing by the state. And child stealing by the state has now come to the fore again with a vengeance. I would be working on that now if I was not spending time having to defend myself and the UKColumn from Iain’s latest ‘constructive criticism’.
During Covid it was UKColumn that led the exposure of vaccine damage and the duplicity of the Yellow Card system. UKColumn reports and has reported, many other subjects that are not within either Iain’s or Richard D Hall’s field of interest. The difference is that we at the UKColumn do not crtiticise Iain or David for their failure to follow our lead in these and other areas.
No, we do not cover a number of other subjects in detail, because we have enough on our plates.
We see that others are doing a good job and we are happy to let them get on with it. Should I write and make ‘constructive criticism’ videos about Iain or Richard D Hall because I don’t fully agree with their position or because neither have supported me on child abuse? Clearly I shouldn’t, as this would be this unhelpful and divisive to everyone working hard to fight the beast emerging around us.
The comments now running on Iain’s Controlled Controlled Psyop Psyop substack piece now demostrate that it has simply achieved an introverted exchange where many people are now suspicious of each other and everyone including Iain. The comment focus is not on the people and mechanisms working to attack us, our families and society, but on who in ‘the movement’ is a bad’un. The poisonous suspicion circulates and grows amongst people who should be supporting each other to give a united strength against the evil state mechanisms destroying our lives. Be it by propaganda and false flag attacks or by stealing our children.
Iain you are effectively saying do as I think and say or I will attack you. You claim that your ‘criticism’ is ‘constructive.’ On the contrary it has the insidious style of ‘passive aggressive’ and this is wrong and very unfair, especially from someone who has been part of the UKColumn literary team.
Your piece is inappropriate and misguided Iain. It helps nobody.
Thanks for replying Brian. I will assume you represent UK Column in my reply.
I don't think it is reasonable for you to describe the argument I have presented as a "hit piece." Sorry you feel that way. I have no idea what "other" hit pieces you believe I've written.
When I published my book I sent copies to all independent media outlets, inviting criticisms or commentary. Of course this was a promotional effort. I have never sent you anything else . So whoever sent you "pages and pages" of my work, it wasn't me.
I do not speak for Richard D. Hall but I do not think the Manchester bombing is the most important thing in the world. I do think the evidence presented is unprecedented and unlike anything we have ever seen with regard to a state orchestrated false flag attack.
The point I have tried to make is not that Manchester itself is the worst crime the state has ever committed but that the evidence is so clear and easy to package as a news report that it presents all of us who oppose the unfolding tyranny a unique opportunity to show our fellow citizens the nature of the state and illustrate to them why we should all oppose its criminal excesses. That is why, in these articles and the accompanying video, I suggest focusing upon the evidence instead of engaging in divisive, speculative allegations. As you said Brian, "it helps nobody."
Clearly you are not convinced by this argument and UK Column do not wish to report this evidence. Of course, that is entirely your choice. I was trying to encourage you to report the evidence but I never assumed I had any right to demand it of you. I note, further down this comment section, you suggests I could have called you and encouraged you that way. Brian, I was fully aware a number of people were asking you to show the Manchester evidence. My articles and video was intended to add to those calls. I do not think you can claim no one was making them.
I accept that UK Column does not want to report the Manchester evidence, while I think this is a huge opportunity missed, there is no more I can say and I won't press the matter any further.
But you have now at least commented on the evidence and I assume this largely reflects UK Column's reason for not reporting it. You wrote that you were not convinced by all of my rather wordy comment and analysis. Fair enough Brian. So what is your analysis of the evidence?
For example, what is your analysis of the fact that the observable physical evidence shows that there was no structural damage inside the City Room just minutes after a huge TATP shrapnel bomb supposedly exploded in it?
Cheers for taking the time & making the effort to respond Brian.
Do you think there is an element of the almost iniquitous child abuse networks influence in the Manchester arena event? Especially considering the 'players' involved?
Also, is EVE Hibbert a genuine person, & if so does she actually resemble the images alleged to be her in the media (which uncannily are ALL constructions as far as can be discerned)?
You may not appreciate some of the comments here that have a lot of experience dealing with the 'overt, covert manipulation of comments' these pages are blighted with. For example the targeting of the most insightful views, made by a TEAM of insidious trolls (The Protue account- now banned) that Iain encouraged to channel the debate away from resolutions & towards petty bitching instead. The harassment Iain has facilitated was a far bigger crime than the now obvious theatre of the Hall court case in many peoples eyes.
I can't put child abuse networks in connection to Manchester and I would not try. I don't have the evidence. My key point has been that child abuse (short of murder)is the taboo which allows people to be blackmailed and controlled. Be they MPs or Judges for that matter. And again to make my point good luck to Richard in putting any evidence or theory forward. Doing so is not a reason to attack me because I think priorities should be elsewhere.
So Martin Hibbet saying his daughter looked like a WOMAN at 14 (when she certainly did not for most observers) didn't get your pea-dough radar twitching ?
The fact there were two different restaurant images of (possible constructed persona) EVE , & one had miraculous lipstick applied to it didn't register in your keen & 'expert' mind as suspicious?
The fact that Martin published an image of the alleged persona EVE as an infant smeared in make up did not alert you in anyway to potential child abuse networking?
The fact it was a concert for impressionable young girls (& some gaymen) involving a MPD MKUltra(ish) 'Kitten sex slave' performer isn't relevant?
Either you started the day in a foggy mood & missed the obvious signifiers in this SPECTACULAR INSULT towards the public, or have become crippled by dementia.
Or you are a useless liar Brian- who has just inadvertently outed their real position here, & shown us all what a farce your public persona is -possibly implying you are a gatekeeper of such vile exploitation, or even complicit with it yourself ?
'' is EVE Hibbert a genuine person, & if so does she actually resemble the images alleged to be her in the media (which uncannily are ALL constructions as far as can be discerned)?''
I said at the start that Manchester was not my priority and if there are concerns over images in the media I will leave the Manchester experts to investigate and produce suitable evidence. I am asked below to do a deep dive into SRA. I understand why, but just how big do people think the UKC team is? I am committed to problems with the family courts and abuse cases at the moment as people can see from the latest UKC interview.
Yes, child abuse is used to control the evil parasites who run the show for their Satanic overlords. It is payment by their overlords for their brief temporal power.
Are you not aware of the RSA that is inherent in virtually every abortion clinic on the planet Brian? If not then you are basically asleep at the wheel! I know this is an extremely upsetting subject for any man or woman of good will, yourself included, and must be brought to light! We would certainly then see the cockroaches scurrying for the dark!
I think you (& everyone else saying that it is Satan ) may be using the wrong term, & missing more potent 'gods' involved in genuine oppression.,
I can think of at least 3 other entities the wealthy revere far more than Satan, & that 'control' the world far more obviously than the 'medium' of TIME/SATURN, which is also the medium of ALL 'good & evil'.
I know many people who 'could be described as Satanists' in my field of work. None of them are 'evil, none abuse children that I'm aware of, all their children are smart, independent & easy going, & typically humours with kind natures. SATANISTS are primarily HEADONISTS & individualistic. How many do you know who are evil & child abusers.
"Satan" is just as fake as the other biBAAL figures. (Edit, or better they took them from earlier myths like Horus=Jesus etc.). But Satan is at least potrayed there as some kind of badass AND rebel while the others eg moses or jesus seem all to be big losers. Guess they put Satan in, to at least have a bit of excitement in their otherwise boring fantasy book (but which still loves "god" wiping out cities, killing babies and animals en masse etc)
Yes in OT Bible GOD IS AUTHOR OF ALL GOOD & EVIL, so god=devil obviously by own definitions!
Idiot Christian (not intelligent ones who do exist) say god is all powerful, then blame Satan for anything they dislike!
Of course Bible written in original form without vowels & as endless sentence, so all quotes are from guess work, translation, transliteration & transposition ! 😂😆😂
Well of course RAM I can't prove to you Satan exists. But, to me, he's as real as I am.
But whether or not you believe is not the point here. These deluded and truly evil parasites at the very top of the food chain believe, worship and take part in many rituals. Sacrificing their own children, summoning demons, etc etc. That this happens is not opinion but fact!
Yes Dave but there is no actual proof it is SATAN, except that to THEM , SATAN = TIME, not a persona.
So, anyways, what proof can you supply Satan exists as a personification/entity other than as the ARENA where all life occurs for yourslf.
Also are you (or anyone) not sacrificing children whenever you masturbate, which is what the great raconteur, humourist, adventurer & well read & creative esoteric scholar Alister Crowley was alluding to about CHILD SACRIFICE, but hysterical idiots always take as a genuine act of murder!
Attack? You are being held to account for your egregious failings as a so-called news outlet. You believe your priorities should be elsewhere. How convenient. Because you don't want your audience to find out about terror hoaxes which the government uses to restrict our freedom and speech. Out and out cowardice.
My goodness you are a grumpy leprechaun Gemma. Terror hoaxes restricting freedom and speech? What planet are you on? The government is simply stealing children from their parents through star chamber family courts, effectively assisting the abuse of children and gagging parents from speaking out about the theft. Not much freedom of speech there. Now we have the NHS believing they can take a young teenage girl from her parents to cut off her breast. And you think the Manchester event is more important? Not for me Gemma. You report Manchester and we will cover the material we think is important.
Ah Brian, your narcissistic pride is hurting. Did nobody tell you leprechauns are fake just like Manchester? You're giving us too many lols at this stage. Stick to what you're good at ie propping up the evil State, promoting rigged selections and pumping out fear porn, and leave the journalism to us. You sold your soul a long time ago. Now go and tell that to your bosses in MI5.
Leave the journalism to you? Absolutely. Now stop being grumpy and get on with your own journalism. UKC will cover the issues we think are important and we certainly won't be bullied into reporting what you or Iain think are the priorities.
I think you're being very unfair to Brian and UKC, Gemma. They have helped bring attention to R D Hall's plight, throughout the course of the legal case against him.
They've also drawn attention to Hall's website, where anybody who wanted (until recently!) could go and discover all the evidence Hall has adduced to support his contentions about the fraudulence of the MA bombing.
Brian has every right to say he has other priorities; it doesn't make him an intelligence asset.
It is easy to find the faults & that is a fashion of the times & environment we are in here, yet to appreciate the good seems very out of fashion.
UK Column were a source for good information & reasoning during the start of the ConVD agenda. While Gemma has said & done some important things. Yet both of you have foibles that may undermine your integrity in the eyes of cynical observers.
What is most saddening is that the divisions just become greater with time, as if division IS the process among any critics of the oppressive Media/Gov/Corp -state machinery. This is no wonder considering the diversity of personalities, resonant topics & vested interests involved.
UK Column now appear to be treading water on many topics, UKRAINE for example is now so obviously a staged 'fake war' for the benefit of the usual arms/real estate vampires that it's is galling listening to the coverage of hysterical propaganda claims. Maybe UKC would benefit by offering more diverse views that are not editorial POLICY & flagged as such for their viewers ?
While Gemma still clings to one of the most oppressive mind control abusers in history- The Catholic Church, a 'conspiracy' most researchers would grow out trusting early on their road of 'informed awareness'.
CHURCH & STATE AGAIN exert their hold it seems?
What everyone should be aware of in this age is that the controlled opposition will give some 'good' information, yet it's aims are always to MAINTAIN the social DYNAMO of antagonism, relying on fashion, taste & conditioning to achieve that. After a time, even the most radical GENUINE opposition can become effectively controlled by external channeling around it, so the state will always win in a media environment.
Also, what we should all bear in mind is that within the control mechanisms are divergent agenda between different cells. They have different tastes in oppression, political, environmental, aesthetic, religious etc. So ,ironically one oppressor is another persons liberator.
Hi Brian - I haven't had time to read Iain's article and I'm not responding to your comment above. I'm just taking advantage of being able to ask you a couple of questions without having to pay 5 quid. I think Richard's being picked on less because of his stance on Manchester than what he revealed later on the nanotech in the jabs. I can understand why UKC doesn't want to get involved in Manchester stuff but why haven't you interviewed him on the nanotech? He was the first person who drew my attention to the subject. No actually I think it was Prof David H. Hughes. Why are you dodging the subject? Also, why did you get rid of Patrick Henningsen just after he started talking about the nanotech? The American guy you replaced him with is a frigging bore. As for Auntie Debbie & Cheryl, like they're a hundred steps behind us.
Yes, Richard Hall did try to persue an independent scientific investigation into the nanotech in the jabs...and proposed a theory about genetic manipulation..and very convincing!
Let's not forget RAM that it's also a dish composed of fruit, meat, cheese, or other ingredients baked over, under, or surrounded by a crust of pastry or other dough. 😎😁
Let us not forget, far more importantly, that this comments section is a controlled environment FULL of trolls, & the most pathetic agents ever deployed by the intelligence agencies !
Totally agree that the child abuse network is vastly more important than a single possibly hoaxed false flag. Expose the Network and the entire cabal would be finished forever. If people actually SAW what category A child abuse actually looks like they would be utterly horrified, never be able to get rid of those images in their heads, understand the monstrous evil that is the cabal and spend the rest of their lives trying to destroy it.
Very well said and indeed very true! Reserved and restrained citizens will easily become ferociously fierce overnight, prepared to tear limb from limb the inherently evil parasites who masquerade as benign public servants and upholders of the law, bankers, industry and business leaders, philanthropists, singers, musicians, actors, tv personalities etc etc etc. Alas, I doubt it will happen. They've been at it for centuries and remained in the shadows.
Brian, much as I loved you for waking me up to the ‘Nudge’, you’re too deep in it to trust. You’ve just proved Iain’s point, methinks. Early 2020 subscriber from Australia here. By late 2020, you were surplus to requirements.
Retardia let me get this straight. I wake you up to mind control and then you say I am too deep in it. Cognitive dissonance I think, but whatever, just follow whoever you think is telling you what you now want to hear.
I can’t be mind controlled Brian. I’m not sure why you have to pick on someone you don’t know who gave you 4 pounds a month out of dwindling finances for a year, then found it very hard to negotiate the ‘unsubscribe’ function on your website, for a reason I imagine. You’re a ‘big’ name in independent media. Go pick on someone your own size.
You're an absolute disgrace, Brian and your squad in JewK Column. You turned your back on Britain's top investigative journalist when he was being attacked on all sides by State gangsters intent on silencing him and bankrupting him. You refuse to show your audience his groundbreaking evidence because YOU are part of the State. To suggest that his investigation into Manchester is probably not the most significant piece of journalism that has been done in recent decades is to be utterly disingenuous. Fake terrorism is what the UK government uses to control the masses and invade foreign countries resulting in the deaths of countless innocent people. A five-year-old could see Manchester was a fraudulent, fake event but you are too cowardly to bring the evidence to your audience. No wonder they are leaving you in droves to follow Iain and RDH. The emperor has no clothes. You should have stayed in the Military. Oh sorry, you never left - at least it seems that way. Explain your funding!!
Stop being grumpy Gemma. Manchester is not my priority. If it is yours that is fine go away and put Manchester on the front page of your newspaper. In fact keep it there so your readers know that there is nothing more important. I will deal with other priorities like child stealing by the state.
Brian, as I tried to highlight in the piece, while you have diligently pieced together various strand of evidence of how the state exploits paedophilia to control assets and MP's and so on, engagement on that large topic requires prolonged audience engagement.
In highlighting the Manchester evidence I am certainly not suggesting that we should ignore things like child abuse, or the climate scam, or other false flag events, manipulated conflicts and all the other awful things the state does in order to manipulate us.
UK Column has often said that it wants to reach out to what James Delingpole calls "normies." And that is why I think the Manchester evidence is so important and strategically useful.
It is damning of the state, in my view, but does not require the audience to engage with lengthy in depth analysis to understand it. They can simply be shown a hoaxed false flag being run in real time. Again, I return to my point that a short, punchy segment could really breakthrough, in my opinion.
But I realise you do not think this evidence is convincing and do not want to report it for that reason. I am not intending to publish anything else asking you to do so. But out of interest, may I again ask what part of the evidence you do not find convincing? Perhaps I have overlooked something, so I would value your observations.
You have said that you would value my observations, so here they are.
Will readers please note that this will be my last comment in Iain's substack goldfish bowl on this issue. I may choose to discuss and comment further elsewhere.
Before I forget Iain, I look forward to that conversation with you as proposed.
My observations on this matter.
Iain, you say that you think the "Manchester evidence is so important and strategically useful." You think "that the [public] audience does not need to engage in lengthy in depth analysis to understand it" and "the evidence is damning." You think that the public "can be shown a hoaxed false flag being run in real time." You think that a short, punchy piece could really [be a] breakthrough."
My observation is that you think a lot, but your approach is unbelievably simplistic. It is academic rather than pragmatic. Do you seriously believe that the 'evidence' as it is, will convice a public that simply doesn't care about a whole host of other major issues? Do you seriously believe Manchester is still more important to everyone than anything else? Really?
In addition, it is very clear to me that you like the idea that you are right, whilst attacking anyone who dares to disagree with you. Yet that is the very style of free speech control that we are all supposed to be fighting.
You could have called to discuss the issue and your concerns. Instead you went for the Iain Davis video limelight with a hit piece on UKC and me in person, promoted in your best interest on your substack of course. As I have already said it helps nobody, but well done, the poisonous attacks and infighting in the comments are increasing.
The wordy pages of 'evidence' that you sent to me regarding Manchester were overwhelmingly blurred and weakened by your opinion on what Richard D Hall had said and your commentary. Evidence is not commentary and opinion.
I actually think that what you provided to me was the poorest analysis that you have written to date and I acknowledge that you have written some really good stuff for the UKColumn.
And to be crystal clear, I am now sharing my opinion here of your work, not an opinion of Richard D Hall's work.
I absolutely disagree with your opinion that Manchester is the most important event and that we must all support you, and do as you think and say, because then we can achieve a breakthrough.
There are many different ways of skinning the stasi state cat. You've written the book, surely with all the evidence that you have written, that is enough for your assured breakthrough. Have the courage of your literary conviction. And work with the Light newspaper in Ireland as they will surely have Manchester on their front page for every edition from here on.
Meanwhile, I have now lost another hour, and whilst you give casual lipservice to the subject of child abuse and child stealing, I am on the case dealing with some utterly broken parents. Victims of the state underworld that I absolutely believe can run Manchester events and deny justice in court.
If you believe Manchester is the silver bullet go for it. Support Richard D Hall, raise money to help pay the huge greedy legal fees and shout out to the world. But just stop trying to pressure me and the UKC because I dare not to agree with your thoughts, opinions and priorities. Your technique is passive aggressive bullying and I am unlikely to be swayed by it.
I asked for your observations on the Manchester evidence as you said you did not find it convincing. As you know, I am convinced by it but I also know I might be wrong so wondered if you saw something I hadn't or had a perspective on it I could learn something from.
With regards to the offered conversation I look forward to discussing how UK Column proposes to report the evidence of the Manchester hoax. I have asked for you to specify the purpose of the meeting and await your reply. If it is not to discuss the reporting the evidence than, in regard to this specific matter, I will respectfully decline as I don't know what the purpose of the meeting is.
This far, your offered observation on the Manchester evidence is that I think a lot of things about it, that my approach is simplistic, evidence won't convince the public, that I think Manchester is more important than anything else, that you are upset that I didn't call you, that I wrote a hit piece on you and UKC, that I sent you wordy pages of evidence--which constituted poor analysis--reiterating again that I think Manchester is more important than anything, that my book alone and my Substack articles should achieve the audience breakthrough I've suggested and that I think I am right and attack everyone who disagrees with me.
Sorry, but that doesn't leave me any wiser about what you think about the Manchester evidence. I know you don't find it convincing but I have no idea why. You have a clearly stated view on it so I assume you are familiar with it. I'm not going to bother asking you about it again. Just like the legacy media and the High Court, it appears to be something you can't discuss Brian. If I'm wrong, please tell me why you do not find the evidence convincing.
I doubt you will read this as I have addressed some of the points you have raised once again elsewhere in this thread and you've ignored them and have continued to make your unfounded allegations. But just to reiterate, the only thing I sent you was a single copy of my book. I have not sent you anything else. I have not written a "hit piece" on you or UK Column and I have never said that I consider Manchester more important than anything else. Your strange claim seem like deflection to me. Clearly you are happy to criticise me and that's fine. The only criticism I have made of you or UK Column is that you haven't reported the Manchester evidence and "I think" you are missing an opportunity in not doing so.
I am a relatively unknown journalist who has reached out to the bigger platforms because "I think" Hall's case has set a precedent for the censorship of all independent media, including UK Column. The whole edifice of the state's case against Hall is based upon their denial of the evidence he reported. Therefore, the whole point of the piece I wrote, hopefully constructively criticising UK Column and other independent media outlets, is that by not reporting the evidence you are allowing that dictatorial process to proceed without challenging it in the most obvious way: report the evidence that the state dare not acknowledge.
Clearly it would be helpful if the bigger outlets reported that evidence. That's why I wrote it.
You keep talking about pointless division, how the antagonism you claim to exist doesn't help and so on. Yet, when a smaller independent journalist who used to contribute to your platform tries to encourage you to report an absolutely blood vital story you respond by claiming offence when none was given, deflect by attacking them and persistently evade giving straight answers to straight questions.
Through reasons of my health reducing the time I get to keep on top of things I am most apologetic for being very late to this conversation (I can't think what to call it) between Iain and Brian.
I am sickened to see Brian squirming around with mealy mouthed comments trying to make snide put-downs of Iain and avoid answering the question in hand. It is not a surprise, sadly, as this was his method in trying to demean those of us who were flabbergasted at the untruth Ben Rubin whined forth about Richard D Hall on the UK Column News, while subtlety implying what a fine chap he himself was. We were pointing out that a lie had been broadcast and needed rectifying, whereupon Brian demeaned us by saying we 'all thought Richard was a Saint' and tried to make us sound stupid.
It was this snake in the grass comment of Ben Rubin’s and the subsequent reaction to it from the management that brought my doubts about the ethos of UKC to a head. Are they really what they say? It’s very convenient to boast chivalry in rescuing children and restoring them to their ill-treated parents when ‘the State’ had snatched them as we are told, because we cannot assess the effectiveness or quantity of this noble work, neither dare we ask anything since it is by nature so delicate and confidential. Sadly, my work from which I am now retired, showed me that such interventions as those Brian hints he is involved in, do not have a high degree of success and – the reason I came across the victims – often lead to greater suffering for which the poor people involved need support in order to simply cope with life, often because the ‘help’ has been administered without the professionalism and expertise such human suffering demands.
The battle in UKC over why it did not cover Richard’s excellent Journalism or show any of his work, produced some astounding insights concerning the basis upon which the Column is run. For example, I happened to mention that you, Iain had been moved to open a forum to say goodbye to us when you were told by the UKC they no longer wanted you (to write). I referred to this, while mentioning Richard, saying you said some very kind things then quoting you -thus explained you’d been told they no longer wanted you to be a contributing writer.
The response I received from the Boss, Mike, to my simple post, was to call me a liar, I think that he wrote ‘This is an absolute lie!’ or words to that effect. I did not crawl back in apology but simply showed my evidence for my words.
This is where we learn that methods and thought processes at the Column are different from most places I have encountered. Mike told me I did not know what had happened. He said ‘You should not write about something you do not know about’. But if UKC don’t tell you – how do you know you do not know? Anyway, apparently, it was not what I had read on UKC.
I asked how were we to know what we had read was not what had happened? If we were not told differently to what was printed on the Column, we would not know differently.
His reply? He told me ‘You should have asked’!!
You see? It works like this;
If something is said or printed on UKC, no, - anything printed/said on UKC, - you must not think you now know what it tells you. If you think it is simply saying what it says and you want to reply to it or talk about it or quote it, DON’T!
YOU MUST ASK MANAGEMENT FIRST! They will tell you what to say – what it really should say.
This is because what you have read does not mean you know what you have read. And you must not write about what you do not know and of course, you do not know that you do not know it.
That is the UK Column logic behind how to respond to anything on a forum or anywhere on the site.
What I learned was, Brian and Mike will not support Richard. Something blocks them. Something about the ‘Manchester Arena Bomb’ throws them into a complete frenzy of fear and dread. Something has them in a vice-like grip over it. To quote a popular image, it causes them the biggest knicker twist you could imagine. And sets us off imagining why.
Any kind of discussion about why the Column has fallen down on its own principles regarding Richard’s excellent work on Manchester and why they won’t stand up for a highly moral fellow Investigative Journalist, or similarly, not give even two minutes air time to illustrate the huge anomalies regarding Manchester which he so powerfully explains, causes them to implode. They would not even just show a couple of the most cogent pictures taken within 4 minutes of the bang of the pristine Merchandise stall and sprightly running woman who claimed to have a bolt go through and through her leg, or how the ‘bomb’ was described and how a real one would have looked and sounded…
They will not say why. Brian comes out with stupid remarks and makes slurs on those of us who regard both Richard and the Manchester event as important. For example, Brian says,
'The real issue here is that to Richard D Hall and Iain, the Manchester bombings are the most important thing in the world.' He knows it is not true. It is not the real issue and they do not think that. He is belittling them and the subject. He does this all the time. He is trying to demean Iain and Richard and take the readers' minds off the fact that he and UKC will not be honest about the Manchester 'bomb' nor about Richard. There is something about the subject that really frightens them. They have a Junior whom they primed to put a slur on Richard’s good name to just show that UKC is not connected to Richard’s work even though they are bountiful enough to have offered him charity (a bit of free membership) when he fell on hard times but they make is clear it was through not being perfect and of course they don’t do things the way he does.
We got the message Brian. And when you wouldn’t be honest and were still demeaning us for pointing out a lie, you brought up that you missed Poppy, your dog that died, just so we couldn’t keep telling you to correct the lie about Richard!
The message that came out reveals UKC are not who they say they are and might have any kind of weird or wonderful motivations or connections. Who knows? They tossed around the idea that Richard was really working for the BBC or MI5, (not the motorway) and we all know people accuse their enemy of the crimes of which they themselves are guilty.
I will answer one last time and it is a very easy reply. You think Iain, that it is an "absolutely blood vital story." I do not think it is an "absolutely blood vital story" and particularly not at the moment with events as they are in the world. There are other priorities. What is weird is that you simply cannot understand my opinion and why I am giving it, but then you never bothered to speak to me about the matter in the first place. Clearly you also have great difficulty in understanding that 1. You may just be wrong in what you think and 2. You still think that by carefully crafted passive aggressive attacks you can get your way. Has your approach helped Richard D Hall? Personally I do not think so. For me your approach has now absolutely poisoned the Manchester cup and I have better things to do than waste more time on this exchange. I suggest again that you get the Irish Light newspaper to run your "absolutely blood vital story" front page and centre pages monthly from here on. Your substack on Manchester will do the rest. Kind Regards Brian G
Regarding stealing children Brian, could the UK Column do a deep, deep dive into what is then done with the stolen children. The main one being for Ritual Satanic Abuse, who was and is involved at the highest levels of public influence, before this relatively easy to find information disappears down the memory hole.
Dave if you have started the investigation, keep going and share the information. A deep deep dive is hours of work and we are a very small team. I am already at capacity with child stealing and talking to abuse surivors. And yes ritualistic stuff comes to the surface in that. We need help, not the regular cry of why can't the UKC do this or that. Many hands make light work.
Ok Brian, that's a fair comment. I've been researching RSA and the who, where, when and why of it all for over twenty years.
I'm sure you've heard the myth about never being more than six feet away from a rat. Well we know it's not true and was probably an exaggeration or misconception of the facts. Well If I was to say that RSA is utterly pervasive in the West and the higher up the food chain we go, the more prevalent it becomes it would be a far more accurate, truthful and sound statement.
No one cares Dave, you admit you obsess about satanic ritual abuse, propelling you on 'Deep Dives' down your grubby 'memory hole' here like gloating pervert aflame with gaslighting BS.
Why would MR Garrish care what you have fantasy about for 20 years !?😂
Dave I think you need to have a rest & reconsider your values !
Fortunately I take no offense whatsoever from your vain attempts to insult and upset.
I find your hateful scorn and barely hidden Jealousy amidst your inane rants and musings and your failing attempts to convey shock and awe to your self perceived audience that you truly believe are locked in enthralled beguilement to be the epitome of self aggrandisement and vainglorious delusion.
Your seething hatred and hostility that your words try to transmit invariably lack substance and depth therefore they will rarely, if ever, instill injury, but much more importantly, the strong emotional reaction that for some reason must build and reinforce your desperate and grasping need for these feelings of superiority, great self worth and importance.
You are an archetypal narcissist displaying all the traits and symptoms and are suffering with one of the worst types of this personality disorder I've ever come across.
You seem very obsessed with 'satanic ritual abuse' so I wonder how many cases of that have been proven compared to CHRISTIAN/CATHOLIC abuse that have been provable? (I will leave evil Muslim rings & Buddhist rapists out of this for now)
Also I wonder if 'satanists' ONLY really exist as inversion of CHRISTIAN ideology ?
[2nd comment] Following on from 1st comment, I would also venture that the child abuse network (as a talking point) is the real 'litmus test' for whether someone is controlled opposition or not. Similar applies to the related MK-Ultra. Notwithstanding the possibility that they don't yet know anything about it or haven't done any research etc. But if they do know about it and studiously avoid talking about it then they are almost certainly controlled opposition.
The reason being it's the great vulnerability for the cabal because every normal person is instinctively protective towards children, and if the knowledge was widespread then it would bring down the cabal in one fell swoop. So it's understandable that controlled opposition would avoid it. Likewise it's predictable they'd come up with something like Qanon to discredit it (similar with the 'false memory syndrome' people).
Maybe Iain hasn't gotten round to it yet (or he has but I missed it somehow), but at least he hasn't gotten involved with the anti-trans cult. That's another dead giveaway, that one.
So Iain only critiques the UKC now that he's N0T "part of the UKColumn literary team"?
Brian, you've said (paraphrasing) "We aim our content at "Middle England"" & on the "virus existence question" you said (paraphrasing again) "I think that our audience is not ready & would be put off by this subject",
It was arrogant for the UKC to assume they have the right to determine what their public is or is not ready to hear, but in doing so have proved they view their audience as children. Note that I have not used the words; "Gatekeeper", "Controlled 0pposition" or "Censorship".
Andy a team player could have given Mike or I a call and discussed this, but no that was too difficult, so here we are wasting time on social media.
You have misquoted me. UKC has often said that we speak to middle England. That means we try and take people who know little but MSM propaganda and get them started on the steps to wider uinformation and understanding. Not to throw all theories and evidence on every subject. That is common sense not arrogance and is one of the reasons we have been able to engage with so many professional people.
"Give you a call"? C'mon there were enough UKC members requesting the issue of "no virus found" be adressed & even Patrick Henningson wasn't allowed to mention the subject whilst presenting the Column.
I'll leave the final word to Henningson "Anyone (in the truth/health freedom movement) who refuses to address the issue regarding the lack of scientific evidence for the existence of viruses as a pathogenic entity is effectively saying;"well...the way to get to the truth, is to not tell the truth, because that's gonna get us to the truth".....& at some point they're not gonna be trusted anymore!"
Nice try Andy. We are talking about Manchester Arena in the first instance, not viruses, but yes Iain as a team player could have picked up the phone. He didn't. The virus issue is a completely different story and yes I remember Patrick Quanten well and am still in contact. We disagree on approach and are still friends. Not sure where Patrick fits in. What he says is correct ..."the lack of scientific evidence." But we are discussing Manchester!!
They can't go there. They're controlled op intelligence assets. They need to keep driving the fear into the sheep who are foolish enough to still watch them. They knew from the outset there was no virus but chose to ignore. Look at the buffoon they interview on the 9/11 scam with the twin towers sticking out of his head. They're laughing at you from GCHQ.
Yeah, the "controlled op intelligence assets" thing was a hard pill to swallow, it wasn't their "news" that got me scratching my head, but UKC members in the forum!
I concocted a reply to Brian but it seems our wires are crossed (& as there's plenty of other people here giving him a piece of their mind...) so won't bother posting, however the final sentence reads;.... "IM0 the UKC does not pursue things with consistency, and only up to the point allowed by the limits of an agenda."
We would like to know too. The story was that he got a new job that was not tourism based and he could not give time to he excellent investigative reports. But I would like to know where he is.
Have any of the 'professional people' grown a pair yet and spoken out, even to their own personal detriment? If not then you may be targeting the wrong audience.
John 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
There are lots of professional people speaking in out and usually they suffer for it. UKC has spoken with and interviewed many of these people. Search the website. We need to encourage each and every one because they have the knowledge to help expose and challenge their own professional encampments.
Are you referring to John of Patmos when he wrote of CHRIST WITH PAPS ?!
''And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle."''Revelation 1:13 (KJV):
Yes, St John the Evangelist. Growing a pair is a common phrase meaning to find courage or bravery when facing danger.
British vernacular paps and its Greek definition are not the same.
Mastos: the breast, Original Word: μαστός, Transliteration: Mastos, Phonetic Spelling: (mas-tos'), Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine, Short Definition: the breast, Meaning: the breast. Always Pleased to enlighten.
Thanks Pauline, appreciated. It was not my intention to provoke UK Column's anger and the response from Brian Gerrish surprised me. Some people have requested that I make the video available for sharing on Odysee and I have now updated it and posted it on Odysee.
"The comment focus (on Iain's substack) is not on the people and mechanisms working to attack us, our families and society, but on who in ‘the movement’ is a bad’un. The poisonous suspicion circulates and grows amongst people who should be supporting each other to give a united strength against the evil state mechanisms destroying our lives. Be it by propaganda and false flag attacks or by stealing our children."
Yet, Ben Rubin was given free rein, unchallenged, to speculate about the possibility of R D Hall being an agent on a UKC broadcast, only a week or two ago.
This sort of hypocrisy doesn't help anyone, does it, Brian?
Cowardice & arrogance .That's what has been displayed by most in the alternative media.
Some commentators in particular disappointed me greatly, with there 'too clever by half ' reasoning . Richard's life has been destroyed, so they should have at least some evidence of the 'asset' argument before even suggesting it. The whole thing has been extremely disheartening. Egos at large & hardly any support for such a courageous man .
B.t.w. I have made it primary study of mine to recognise the signs & symbols (often masonic in origin) that controlled opposition invariably display & Richard has never, ever, communicated any .
I did my bit on a forum I belong too & the cowardice fuelled silence there was an eye opener too.
Well done Iain for having the bollocks & decency to work so hard .
There really is no 'truther movement ' that's patently clear.
So many should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, the way this whole thing has panned out .
Light-paper just OUT themselves as MASONIC stooge distraction, agitation & data mining front by being snide & smug over serious comment worth considering.
Thank you lightpaper cretin account for making us all aware at how rubbish your mind is, while resorting to typical tactics & evasion.
I ask seriously to you oh, so clever , snobs: What is HALLS connection to SPRING BBC Bitch proven by STAG RING ? When you know you would not snicker like children in sugar rush then , & instead will be slapping faces in shame of arrogant stupidity !🙄😂😆😂
ALSO, WTF does 'lols' mean = laugh out loud's, when LOL would suffice, or better yet learn to use EMOJI you pathetic inept goon 😂
Yes you are pathetic anal kunt lightweight paper.🙄😂🤣😂
Keep tROTTING ABOUT being obvious shill pony,
some of us have done real investigation in life, while you just parasite other peoples ideas & work,
what have you ever done that is original ? Nothing. It is all already known.
What of his POTENTIALLY satanic features is obvious JOKE among serious point! 🙄😂🤣 that is why POTENTIALLY was used I think.
You prove you are not fit to differentiate tone of voice in writing & confuse humour as psychosis, so must be psychotic yourself, with brain of infant !
It's more pathetic that you are so terminally deluded , can't write 'cunt' even though an adult, (seriously) use cunt as a derogatory word, while behaving as a twitchy little prick trying to type with someone else's useless tool.
I love how you call yourself after Lucifer & let everyone know your a thin veneer for Masonic concerns, Maybe generations of incest does that to arrogant & degenerating minds though?
There are too many errors , omissions & distractions in this & the 'film' to begin rectifying it.
One is worth highlighting now though.
David Scott made good points for example, except again he reinforces the idea of 'silencing' rather than 'intimidating'. However,he also falls short by not being aware of the Hall Bombing Hoax Overview. How long would that take, a few hours of watching some potent videos!
The crux of this many layered MISDIRECTION GAME is to make us imagine a threat is a fact- the threat being silencing & legal penalisation,
While it is 'really' a cognitive conditioning phantasm employed to intimidate free expression ( via an artificially constructed consensus morality/legality ).
What Iain & others evade is the probability the court action was Theatre, not a valid legal president, except as a SPECTACLE of such. If so the nature of Iains argument is more a tedious ramble around already well trodden territory.
In fact I'm amazed at the lack of proper 'research methodologies' that have been applied to this overt fiasco. Who has managed to endure reading HIBBERTS 'incredible & unbelievable' BOOK for example? Who has ever verified Eve Hibberts existence, or non existence?
Only the most slug-like minds didn't realise Manchester was another ludicrous 'Constructed Event' as soon as the iffy footage was shown in most cases. We were all media bombarded with similar events every few months before ConVD , then they suddenly ceased.
Hall never convinced hardly anyone who wasn't already AWARE it was a hoax event.
I think the nuts & bold of this construct are now well worn & instead more fruit can be found with the SYMBOLISM involved, something that is conceded as intrinsic with this , yet always skipped over, or diminished with a shallow bigoted prejudice.
Lastly (for now...!) is this useless drunken idea of a 'The controlled controlled opposition psyop psyop' ..... Just use some punctuation for a start ! ......then a sober mind would realise it is an absurd way of saying ''Puppet Plants''
'Hall never convinced hardly anyone who wasn't already AWARE it was a hoax event.'
I have to disagree RAM. I believe Richard has indeed convinced many sleeping citizens and fence sitters alike. You very well may be guilty of believing that everyone has, or should have, your innate levels of intuition.
I have been guilty many times of expecting my family and closet friends to understand things that I consider to be quite explicit and elementary.
This is certainly not always the case. They have not been able to rely on their intuition alone, but have needed to see loads of primary sources of evidence, or "facts", to convince them of the reality that I want to share.
Who encouraged the 'Hall is a bit of a twat really' idea? You Iaini, by lack of action , pacifist hypocrisy with ProLIES team here, then with interviews with two rubbish little witches with big spoons for stirring.
You make me laugh at evasions, denials & now whimpering like wounded animal who has gnawed its own paws off due to starvation of common sense & integrity.
Though to boil it down I would qoute, as you do, Dr David Hughes - "It is sufficient to look at the primary, observable evidence, which Hall [has] presented".
That's it.
The rest is psyop on psyop on controlled opposition on psyop.
Use your discernment and don't get involved in the fog that the state creates.
Brian Gerrish replied my post but I seem to be unable to respond as when I try to post this isn't happening? I'm therefore posting my reponse here:
Brian, I think you know full well that the criticisms of UKC’s coverage of the Manchester hoax do not originate with how it reported the case of RDH after this court case began. Iain’s criticism of UKC’s coverage goes back to when Richard broadcast his first Manchester documentary in 2020. Whether people believe “Manchester is the most important event in the world” (as you write in your slightly mocking tone) this does not excuse you and UKC from responsibility to show or at least describe RDH’s wealth of evidence showing Manchester to be a hoax. The diversionary tactic you have employed by talking about the importance of child abuse as an excuse for not fully engaging with Manchester doesn’t wash. No one who wants the evidence of the Manchester hoax disseminated as widely as possible is downplaying the very serious and evil phenomenon of child abuse and I find this implied assertion distasteful. I also find your baseless claim that “You [i.e. me] like many people assume that we have never helped or sought to help Richard D, Hall” an unnecessary presumption and more damningly an attempt to evade the main criticism contained within Iain’s video wherein your limited support for RDH’s legal rights in relation to his court case is acknowledged. The criticism as I think you understand clearly - but are studiously choosing to ignore - is about supporting Richard’s evidence-based research which proves that Manchester was indeed a hoax. As Iain points out, had you shown this evidence the ‘dangerous environment’ you predicted as far back as 2018 might have been more robustly challenged and the efforts of the state to claim that there is no evidence of a hoax at the Manchester Arena would have been exposed. This is the support Iain suggests UKC might have given. Finally, you repeatedly state that Manchester is not your ‘priority’. This may be the case and of course UKC is entitled to produce what it wants to produce. Outside the ‘UKC News’ and ‘Extra’ you have produced numerous programmes some of which are of great value, others less so, but are you seriously saying that since 2020 all of the work the UKC Team has done has been more important than exposing the Manchester hoax? If your answer to this question is ’yes’ I think people will conclude that there are more damning reasons as why you avoid doing so and this has nothing to do with time or claims about more important ‘priorities’
I've had the same problem. Thanks to Blue Sky Maiden for this fix.
1. Write your full comment.
2. Cut and save it in your clipboard.
3. Type a place holder "**" or "nn" or something and then post the comment where you want to post it.
4. Once posted edit the comment and replace the placeholder with your pasted full comment, then save the updated comment and it should be posted where you intended to post it.
I searched for my post after I posted it and could not find it, there seemed to be technical issues preventing the post so I kept trying. I will of course delete previous attempts at posting if I can locate these
"Also Brian did write HALL DID NOT WANT TO BE COVERED BY THEM !!!!"
RDH may have been advised by his counsel not to make public statements or to be seen as encouraging others to do so during the trial (this is speculation on my part) but as I state in my post Iain correctly identifies that UKC understood the importance of the Manchester Hoax from at least 2020, so from this point up to the start of the trial they had ample opportunity to support Richard by disseminating his evidence in a way that would certainly have been welcomed by him.
The Manchester story needs to be told, and Richard D Hall has been doing brilliant truth journalism for 15 years.
But it is not the silver bullet; neither is the fact that viruses don't cause disease, climate change is the weather, vaccines only maim and kill, 9/11 was an inside job and nobody has ever been to the moon. Yet each of those hoax proponents will tell you that if only the public knew about it, they would see all the other deceptions and then the cabal would fall.
I'm willing to bet that almost everyone has a unique 'waking up' story - and the final straw that nudged you into really researching everything you have been told will be different.
So having an alternative media is vital to disseminate missing information - but they are INDEPENDENT James Corbett said of the criticism of what he doesn't cover - "it's called the Corbett Report - i decide what i investigate and publish, nobody else."
Slagging off people for not covering a particular topic does not help anyone. But it does encourage division, as evidenced by the comments.
Let's all spend time naval-gazing and arguing instead of alerting the public to the fact the rulers are trying to kill us. That's the psyop.
The articles and the video have been published because slagging people off, publicly speculating they might be COINTEL without any evidence or even logical reason for doing so, for example, is, as you say, "divisive" and unhelpful. I specifically discussed exactly this in the two pieces and I pointedly stated I was not accusing anyone of being controlled opposition.
Like 9/11, 7/7 the Covid and climate scams, etc., Manchester is not the "silver bullet." But again, as pointed out in the articles, it stands apart from these other events and issues because of the clear, practically irrefutable primary observable evidence of the hoax being perpetrated in real time.
Unlike other false flag attacks we do not need to analyse a large body of evidence to expose the fraud. With Manchester the most damning evidence can be packaged into a short, punchy news item.
Surely the dissemination of information or raising awareness is not the only purpose of the independent media? It is also to stand against tyranny and, again, this is another reason why the Manchester evidence stands apart.
Hall was prosecuted for no reason because the Establishment wanted to hide that evidence. So scared is the Establishment of this evidence that it dare not even admit that it exists.
Hall's trial has set a case precedent to shout down investigative journalism using fabricated harassment claims and as a basis for further legislation to ostensibly end free speech.
Again, showing or reporting the Manchester evidence undermines the basis for the ruling in Hall's case and, therefore, practically destroys the alleged foundation of the planned censorship regime. It shows "conspiracy theorists" are not deranged subversives but, in fact, ordinary rational people with good reason to question the state.
Yet, instead of seizing this opportunity, all I hear from the leading independent media outlets are the reasons not to show the evidence. I wrote the articles and made the video to try to explain why we must show the evidence.
I cannot force and certainly would not demand that other outlets show the evidence but I did want to make the argument to encourage them to do so.
You encouraged us - an edit of your first part will be on page 6 of next month's The Light, along with a big picture of the city room photo (the unpixellated one, though it's stil terrible quality - another false flag giveaway..)
But i agree with you; others won't, and i wouldn't spend any time worrying about it enough to call out anyone in particular, or even the movement as a whole.
We all have limited time and resources, and so must focus on whatever moves us individually. I'm pretty sure God evenly distributes the tasks and topics across all those He has caused to see through the deceptions of the world and motivated to speak loudly about.
Hi "the Lightpaper" please don't use the Parker photo. Most people who look at it think it looks like a bomb scene. There are much better images to use which do clearly show fakery. Let me know if you want the article I suggested and I'll send you some with it.
Thanks Darren (I assume.) Rather than edit my post do I have time to write you a 1000 words just to briefly lay out and highlight why the Manchester evidence is so unique and important? Let me know if you have a deadline I can get something to you in the next couple of days if that's acceptable for you.
Possibly one of the most uptight , uninformed & triggered people I've ever discussed 'conspiracy's' with was a main Light Newspaper vendor in Sheffield,
The jerk there didn't even acknowledge NASA were a maya machine of funding vampirism. I don't see what you're achieving apart from churning out fodder for the same old endless fear, misery & impotency factory.
It NEEDS to be divisive- as you lot are a conceited clump of shallow poseurs most of the time, like a bunch of smug grub 6th formers busy polishing your prefect badges & stroking your boils.
Look at the state of you all & get a fukn' grip ! MiriMi the posh mediocre poseur with behavioural studies daddy, Assling O'psycho the unbelievable hysteric actress- shes done it all & knows ALL THE PLAYERS don't you know, from weather girl to fashion news, madness is her currency. Then there was your breath taking hypocrisy & flirting with the PRO-LIES mental case & MPD 'SPY FROM ANOTHER DIMENSION' (her arse) EverLyin' Bumsick.
Really Iain, you had an opportunity for a great informed comments section, but due to cowardice or compromise have made yourself a clown in a shoddy little circus.
Nobody can be told the true nature of the system, they have to see it for themselves. They have to want to find the truth.
But, once they see it, then what?
That's where most of us are.
I've seen a few potential "movements" come and go, Monetary reform ~30yrs ago, usurped from within by "global warming" nonsense; Occupy, usurped from within by "climate change" nonsense; Peak Oil (real phenomena or manufactured doesn't matter the movement had legs) usurped from within by "Climate change nonsense. Permaculture, again usurped by "climate change" nonsense, although it spawned RegenAg, which has legs now, and there's some resistance to the climate nonsense as a lot of leading proponents reject the CC meme because they understand the carbon cycle, the system is trying to real it in with monetary temptations in the form of carbon credits, but there's still potential to at least fix the food system.
‘But, once they see it, then what?’ you change your life step by step so that you become a shining light of hardly using the system and living well and prosperously. everyone’s path is different, but it’s those things that make you excited and daunted at the same time.
The people did not defeat the soviet union. They went around it - black/free markets etc.
Economy first, because no-one cares about politics if they need to eat. Peace.
Probably the most important video of the last 10 years. Profound in its insight and implications, this is a devastating critique of the 'independent media' by Iain in relation to Richard D. Hall's overwhelming and compelling evidence that the Manchester Arena event is indeed one of the biggest political scandals ever perpetrated by the British state. I fear that if they don't heed his call to share RDH's evidence with their audiences (rather than merely voicing limited dissent over the supression of his rights to fully defend himself at the High Court) then they will suffer considerable damage in the eyes of those wanting to fight the abuse of power by the state in this country.
OMG , MW (masonic shill name) learn to connect your over heated brain to you hands- that gush from you is one of the most inane pieces of anal waffle I've read today !
All very well Mark but Richard D Hall asked us not to report from the time of his court case. He then hosted people attacking us. Aside from that if you believe that Manchester is the most important event in the world then stand up and report it. We will be the first to congratulate you. We have other priorities at the moment. You like many people assume that we have never helped or sought to help Richard D Hall. That is not true we offered him support a long time ago. You can lead a horse to water..
That is most incredible information I hear in these mostly iffy comments!
Thank you so very much for sharing that vey surprising view=
''...Richard D Hall asked us not to report from the time of his court case.''
Did he supply reason for request? (Here I am strictly speculating)
Like: 'Hi Brian & team, I am on lemming run & wish myself to appear even more despicable than Alistair Crowley, please do not help me as it may interfere with scripted outcome too much. I am Britain's sickest man proud of the fact (then a series of expletives to cement his point) ! ' ?
Whatever he say, fact is by requesting you to evade commentary has brought you much vilification among interested people! So many little moaners say you are pussybums for not covering Halls lemming run !
Maybe it would have been better for everyone if you mention this earlier ?
Some people have requested that I make the video available for sharing on Odysee and I have now updated it and posted it on Odysee.
Anyone interested can watch and share it from Odysee: - https://odysee.com/@InThisTogether:d/Manchester-Attack-Independent-Media-Failure:1
Or they can view the corresponding Substack post here: - https://iaindavis.substack.com/p/the-controlled-controlled-opposition-014
This is my reply to Brian Gerrish from UK Column. For some reason I cannot reply to him directly. Apologies to all and Brian in particular.
**********************************
Thanks for replying Brian. I will assume you represent UK Column in my reply.
I don't think it is reasonable for you to describe the argument I have presented as a "hit piece." Sorry you feel that way. I have no idea what "other" hit pieces you believe I've written.
When I published my book I sent copies to all independent media outlets, inviting criticisms or commentary. Of course this was a promotional effort. I have never sent you anything else . So whoever sent you "pages and pages" of my work, it wasn't me.
I do not speak for Richard D. Hall but I do not think the Manchester bombing is the most important thing in the world. I do think the evidence presented is unprecedented and unlike anything we have ever seen with regard to a state orchestrated false flag attack.
The point I have tried to make is not that Manchester itself is the worst crime the state has ever committed but that the evidence is so clear and easy to package as a news report that it presents all of us who oppose the unfolding tyranny a unique opportunity to show our fellow citizens the nature of the state and illustrate to them why we should all oppose its criminal excesses. That is why, in these articles and the accompanying video, I suggest focusing upon the evidence instead of engaging in divisive, speculative allegations. As you said Brian, "it helps nobody."
Clearly you are not convinced by this argument and UK Column do not wish to report this evidence. Of course, that is entirely your choice. I was trying to encourage you to report the evidence but I never assumed I had any right to demand it of you. I note, further down this comment section, you suggests I could have called you and encouraged you that way. Brian, I was fully aware a number of people were asking you to show the Manchester evidence. My articles and video was intended to add to those calls. I do not think you can claim no one was making them.
I accept that UK Column does not want to report the Manchester evidence, while I think this is a huge opportunity missed, there is no more I can say and I won't press the matter any further.
But you have now at least commented on the evidence and I assume this largely reflects UK Column's reason for not reporting it. You wrote that you were not convinced by all of my rather wordy comment and analysis. Fair enough Brian. So what is your analysis of the evidence?
For example, what is your analysis of the fact that the observable physical evidence shows that there was no structural damage inside the City Room just minutes after a huge TATP shrapnel bomb supposedly exploded in it?
I offer my analysis here for those interested:
https://odysee.com/@InThisTogether:d/Manchester-Attack-No-Bomb-Evidence:3
I look forward to reading your response.
History will record your principled stance Iain and judge the response of Brian Gerrish and UKC accordingly.
UKC are terrified of being de-platformed, so they're tactically hedging over the Manchester Arena fraud, in the interests of self preservation.
I don't think there's anything more to it than that.
I think that's probably correct, but if that is indeed their position they should be honest with their audience and not maintain that they have supported RDH thoughout.
To be fair to Brian, I think UKC has been pretty good in keeping its audience abreast of developments in Hall's ongoing legal debacle.
And the UKC team as a whole are entitled not to venture any opinions on Hall's case that they consider too far beyond their remit. That's a straightforward editorial decision, the likes of which could be found in any news media outlet.
That aside, where Brian seems to be out of his depth is revealed in the nature of his response to Iain's perfectly reasonable questions in this very forum.
Having put himself on the hook, Brian would be well advised to offer some form of direct answer to these questions, or he'll risk damaging not only his journalistic integrity, but the Column's as well.
On a personal note, I've been a paid subscriber to UKC for many years. I have found great comfort and illumination in their work, particularly during the COVID fraud.
I've stopped watching Monday's broadcast, however, because I find that combination of presenters lacks the weight, polish and incisiveness I've come to expect from the Column as a brand. Most notably, much as I admire him as a man, I don't think Mr Gerrish is a good choice for anchor, anymore.
In not explaining to their audience that the Manchester Arena event was a hoax used to justify air attacks on Libya - which resulted in the deaths of innocent people - they have effectively protected the perpetrators who will no doubt use the tactic of false flag fake terror in the future to justify more military assaults on other innocent people. UKC is the biggest and most well resourced independent media outlet in the UK, if they had clearly reported Manchester as a hoax some in the msm would have felt compelled to at least acknowledge Hall's evidence, but UKC have effectively supressed this evidence and have not even described what it is let alone shown it. If they had broadcast Hall's evidence to their sizeable audience those responsible for perpetrating these hoaxes would perhaps have thought twice next time or at least been put under more pressure to resist the temptation to repeat this tactic. UKC know the truth and so must bear some responsibility when those powers which are ranged against us use the propaganda of 'terrorist attacks' as justification to kill more people in the future. The UKC Team will bear some of the blame for this and will in a moral sense have blood on their hands.
But UKC did direct those interested in Hall's case to his website.
I don't think they had any obligation to do more, frankly.
If people want to be spoon fed all their information, without doing even a modicum of work themselves, I'd say there is little prospect of any significant change for the better, however indictable the state is for its crimes.
If they're "tactically hedging" then I think they've already deplatformed themselves.
I'm still trying to figure out what "controlled controlled opposition psyop psyop" means.
I'd lean into this verdict instead of trying to fight it openly.
What they are basically saying is, "It's a heinous crime against human decency and privacy to film someone without their knowledge during the course of their day".
With this, we can then refocus their own rhetoric towards street cameras, traffic cameras, speed cameras, police body cams, dash cams, CCTV. The full blown surveillance state they are hypocritically operating.
Now one can only defend this by saying, "Ah, but this is all to protect people from crime and terrorism".
Then we ask was Hall not also filming people to protect people from crime and terrorism.
But, they say, the targets weren't committing a crime, so it's wrong. But then neither are the people in street and traffic footage.
And we have that either the government is committing a heinous crime on an industrial scale, or hall wasn't.
Excellent point. Thanks.
I was going to mention just that point Mara, we are spied on evetime we leave home (& in it sometimes).
Also I should ask 'who is innocent' in this age of ubiquitous media invasion & influence?
U seem to think the "state" has to follow the same rules/laws like a normal citizen. It is a romantic view . Sure u get lots of likes for it, but it is totally unrealistic .. For intel and milliary they can basically do what they want. If RDH thought he can "spy" on some girl cuz the "state" does it all day long to everyone, then he is stupid (if we assume this affairs is real at all, prob not :P)
Apparently, there are more CCTV's in Britain per capita than anywhere else in the world. Talk about the irony and rank hypocrisy of these chancers, it's breathtaking, LOL.
Yet when my friends phone gets nicked from behind the counter by a customer in his shop having both the cctv footage and the mans details because he paid card for something else the police don't want to know and he had to bring a private prosecution.
People don’t understand the real purpose of the police and courts., (privately owned entities and not public) is to uphold the powers of “the state” not to solve or prevent crime, or meet out justice.
The police are a criminal gang of Freemasons and thugs, maintaining control through Order ab Chao.
The police, courts and govts are all privately owned and incorporated entities, not public institutions. The public own no shares/stock of these corporate entities and can’t dissolve, restructure, reform or audit them.
The public aren’t even aware the entire legal system isn’t lawful (including common law which is derived from canon law - the Vatican) reducing status of free men and women to that of legal fiction, slaves owned by “the state”.
The “police” are involved in criminal fraud, organized crime, drug trafficking, human trafficking, prostitution, staging hoaxes and covering up state crimes.
Oh yes indeed Chunky, I agree with your sentiment.
There are drug dealers who all park up and congregate around a 24 hour shop a couple of miles from me. Virtually everyone who uses this shop, even occasionally, have no problem identifying the drug dealers. They often have issues amongst themselves. In the last few months, one had his hand chopped off and another was shot and badly injured. Yet the Police seem completely oblivious to all this shit that's going down right under their noses, bless.
Having said that, the drug dealers predominantly have protected characteristics, so it's only right and proper that they are afforded the opportunity to earn an easy, lucrative living, regardless of the consequences for society at large.
And heaven forbid we call them out for their crimes and kick up a stink. I mean, who could possibly live down the shame of being accused of discriminatory behaviour against the disadvantaged?
''Yet the Police seem completely oblivious to all this shit that's going down right under their noses, bless.''
Dave, brother of Maxine the serial abuser ? Is a child in sheltered uppity middle class delusions ! Dave is so unaware of how world around him functions that he always appear an opinionated idiot whatever he discuss!
It is quite incredible!
Here Dave is utterly clueless how Police facilitate & even supply local vice networks. 🙄😂😆😂
Well, all I can say is that I'm simply in awe of your almost occult like knowledge and simply breathtaking insights into what's going on behind the curtain, the kind of stuff us sheeple can't even begin to comprehend!
If you had a better understanding of English, you would have known in what context the word bless was used at the end of the sentence about the Police. It can be a very nuanced language, English. So because English is not be your native language, I infer no criticism here.
😆😂Evasion as usual from biggest suckdog face on substack David Carr brother of serial abuser Maxine?
Go on little child with tantrum reflex, show us how fast you can decompose before our eyes!
💩🤡👻
Maybe she is a CCP bot, but as the nuance really did go over her head and create a troll. Sad.
Love your description of protected characteristics. That's exactly why those sex gangs continued for so long, still exist in parts unchallenged and why Hue Edwards isn't in prison. With the sex gangs they like to claim it was a minority element of the community but given the amount those girls were thrown around it was most likely a majority element of the community. They just don't care. Go to India, Pakistan or even Africa it's interesting how some people just don't know how to clean up after themselves.
Just tell your kids, friends and family in job applications to tick the other box for race and at least bi sexual for orientation. You can seriously game the system that way too and be a protected species. Funny though if we were to look at "the science" or more correctly maths the white man is the one dying out, but we can't talk about that because it's nazi like everything else.
''Oh yes indeed Chunky,''
🙄😂😆😂
And the police have the gall to wonder why we have no respect for them anymore.
Everyone is equal under the law - except when they're not.
True! if you are a fair minded, principled and considerate individual you are not suitable recruitment material for plod today.
Is he a useless jerk like you then Clunky Monk-kid?
IS being a loser a terminal past time for you both?
Ireland right behind, don't worry.
Hear, hear! 👏👏👏👏
Now you've said it!
This entire soap opera of a trial has alerted me to the distinct possibility of a major upcoming false flag event in the UK which must be believed or at least unquestioned.
The recent news that all the CCTV cameras in London have been turned off since September adds to my conviction that such an event will be forthcoming in the very near future.
Eve's Law will not stop me watching and waiting for the next instalment, delivered courtesy of British plotters and their undercover actors.
Somehow, I don't think I will be alone.
You most assuredly will not be!
Rather in the US, see my psot on the Trump(ler) :)
Some of the comments here are totally baffling and seem to missing the point. Let's all focus on the clear message in Iain's video which is about the need of the independent media to disseminate Richard Hall's evidence to their audiences, as well as examining the extent to which they have allowed the state's/msm's attempted character assassination of him to frame their own thinking and distract them from endorsing unequivocally the unassailable fact that the Manchester Arena event was a false flag HOAX.
The evidence is that the alleged Manchester Arena Bombing is a HOAX EVENT.
Further, the evidence is that the court case against Hall is invalid due to ' blatant corruption & evasion of the evidence', & is also a HOAX EVENT.
Anyone desperate to evade the later point here is either a troll/shill/plant or maggot brained imbecile.
Have you watched the videos of him converting his cheap home on a shoestring budget? Collecting rainwater, collecting free fire wood, trying to grow veg in a tiny back yard, etc etc? If Richard is anything other than what we see, he's certainly doing it for nowt as he's considerably poorer than I am.
He could have carried on earning relatively good money as an accomplished electronics engineer. He will now earn nothing pretty much after this lot!
Are you a rich bitch then Dave brother of serial abuser Maxine ?
Hall must have earned at least 30k per year to survive without work with family ?
Why you trolling someone for their surname?
She’s asking why apologists for Hall, Iain and this seemingly staged, hoax trial seem to be ignoring the obvious.
We aren’t privy to Hall’s financial status or his intentions.
But Hall implicated himself in unnecessary, alleged surveillance activity, whilst simultaneously establishing through hearsay the existence of “Eve” who appears to be a composite character, a fiction, a paste up and illusory. Which would make the entire trial a joke and con on Hall’s audience and others who know the Manchester Arena incident was a hoax and a drill. Right?
Consequently, Hall’s behavior is questionable at best and falls into line with many of the hoaxed trials we’ve seen play out in the alt and msm, including the Alex Jones fake trial, the Reiner Fuellmich fake trial, the CJ Hopkins fake trial, and many more.
So maybe Hall is fake too with that logic?
Monkey Juice troll
🙄🥱😫😴
💩🤡👻
''Stupid, we keep the chunky monkeys
Just hit the mystery box, bitch, don't approach me
King Kong clips in my Glock, stay with the donkey
Caeser in this bitch and all of my nigglas toting
Food for thoughts, banana clips got him chunky
Fuck that vest, real nigglas shootin' at gold teeth
Monkey see, monkey do, finna shoot up his ProLie team
Codeine and Sprite, you know that keep me dozin'
Lots of rocks in my ear, your speech frozen
That bullshit you want me to hear, I don't condone it
Chunky monkeys is this ProLies bitch, don't care 'bout statements
Stop playin', have brains on the wall like it was Facebook
Watch your step, boy, you know these custom BAPE kicks
Scuff these models boy, you might just catch a facelift
Gang shit, all my nigglas playin' with Franklins
You peeking or speaking, if not, then stay in your lane, bitch, The Plug''
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abrw97hXfjk
🙄😂
''Apt for the desperate apekid''.
It has brain of maggot & anus of baboon.
I sigh as I read another Iain Davis hit piece on UKColumn, and me in person, because we have not covered the Manchester bombings in the way that Iain Davis sees fit. My goodness, a video to attack me this time. Perhaps I should feel honoured that I am the target of a substack video hit.
The real issue here is that to Richard D Hall and Iain, the Manchester bombings are the most important thing in the world. And both are entitled to think so. Iain is so deep into it that he has written a book and sent me pages and pages for me to read. Presumably so that I will be convinced that it should be my key priority. Unfortunately I was not convinced by all of his rather wordy comment and analysis, nor that the subject of the Manchester bombings should immediately be my key reporting priority.
But I respect Ian’s opinion and I certainly respect the work that Richard D Hall has done.
Over the years, my personal prority has been on different subjects. For example Common Purpose, Global governance, propaganda, mind control and its attack on society, and child stealing by the state. And child stealing by the state has now come to the fore again with a vengeance. I would be working on that now if I was not spending time having to defend myself and the UKColumn from Iain’s latest ‘constructive criticism’.
During Covid it was UKColumn that led the exposure of vaccine damage and the duplicity of the Yellow Card system. UKColumn reports and has reported, many other subjects that are not within either Iain’s or Richard D Hall’s field of interest. The difference is that we at the UKColumn do not crtiticise Iain or David for their failure to follow our lead in these and other areas.
No, we do not cover a number of other subjects in detail, because we have enough on our plates.
We see that others are doing a good job and we are happy to let them get on with it. Should I write and make ‘constructive criticism’ videos about Iain or Richard D Hall because I don’t fully agree with their position or because neither have supported me on child abuse? Clearly I shouldn’t, as this would be this unhelpful and divisive to everyone working hard to fight the beast emerging around us.
The comments now running on Iain’s Controlled Controlled Psyop Psyop substack piece now demostrate that it has simply achieved an introverted exchange where many people are now suspicious of each other and everyone including Iain. The comment focus is not on the people and mechanisms working to attack us, our families and society, but on who in ‘the movement’ is a bad’un. The poisonous suspicion circulates and grows amongst people who should be supporting each other to give a united strength against the evil state mechanisms destroying our lives. Be it by propaganda and false flag attacks or by stealing our children.
Iain you are effectively saying do as I think and say or I will attack you. You claim that your ‘criticism’ is ‘constructive.’ On the contrary it has the insidious style of ‘passive aggressive’ and this is wrong and very unfair, especially from someone who has been part of the UKColumn literary team.
Your piece is inappropriate and misguided Iain. It helps nobody.
Thanks for replying Brian. I will assume you represent UK Column in my reply.
I don't think it is reasonable for you to describe the argument I have presented as a "hit piece." Sorry you feel that way. I have no idea what "other" hit pieces you believe I've written.
When I published my book I sent copies to all independent media outlets, inviting criticisms or commentary. Of course this was a promotional effort. I have never sent you anything else . So whoever sent you "pages and pages" of my work, it wasn't me.
I do not speak for Richard D. Hall but I do not think the Manchester bombing is the most important thing in the world. I do think the evidence presented is unprecedented and unlike anything we have ever seen with regard to a state orchestrated false flag attack.
The point I have tried to make is not that Manchester itself is the worst crime the state has ever committed but that the evidence is so clear and easy to package as a news report that it presents all of us who oppose the unfolding tyranny a unique opportunity to show our fellow citizens the nature of the state and illustrate to them why we should all oppose its criminal excesses. That is why, in these articles and the accompanying video, I suggest focusing upon the evidence instead of engaging in divisive, speculative allegations. As you said Brian, "it helps nobody."
Clearly you are not convinced by this argument and UK Column do not wish to report this evidence. Of course, that is entirely your choice. I was trying to encourage you to report the evidence but I never assumed I had any right to demand it of you. I note, further down this comment section, you suggests I could have called you and encouraged you that way. Brian, I was fully aware a number of people were asking you to show the Manchester evidence. My articles and video was intended to add to those calls. I do not think you can claim no one was making them.
I accept that UK Column does not want to report the Manchester evidence, while I think this is a huge opportunity missed, there is no more I can say and I won't press the matter any further.
But you have now at least commented on the evidence and I assume this largely reflects UK Column's reason for not reporting it. You wrote that you were not convinced by all of my rather wordy comment and analysis. Fair enough Brian. So what is your analysis of the evidence?
For example, what is your analysis of the fact that the observable physical evidence shows that there was no structural damage inside the City Room just minutes after a huge TATP shrapnel bomb supposedly exploded in it?
I offer my analysis here for those interested:
https://odysee.com/@InThisTogether:d/Manchester-Attack-No-Bomb-Evidence:3
I look forward to reading your response.
Cheers for taking the time & making the effort to respond Brian.
Do you think there is an element of the almost iniquitous child abuse networks influence in the Manchester arena event? Especially considering the 'players' involved?
Also, is EVE Hibbert a genuine person, & if so does she actually resemble the images alleged to be her in the media (which uncannily are ALL constructions as far as can be discerned)?
You may not appreciate some of the comments here that have a lot of experience dealing with the 'overt, covert manipulation of comments' these pages are blighted with. For example the targeting of the most insightful views, made by a TEAM of insidious trolls (The Protue account- now banned) that Iain encouraged to channel the debate away from resolutions & towards petty bitching instead. The harassment Iain has facilitated was a far bigger crime than the now obvious theatre of the Hall court case in many peoples eyes.
I can't put child abuse networks in connection to Manchester and I would not try. I don't have the evidence. My key point has been that child abuse (short of murder)is the taboo which allows people to be blackmailed and controlled. Be they MPs or Judges for that matter. And again to make my point good luck to Richard in putting any evidence or theory forward. Doing so is not a reason to attack me because I think priorities should be elsewhere.
So Martin Hibbet saying his daughter looked like a WOMAN at 14 (when she certainly did not for most observers) didn't get your pea-dough radar twitching ?
The fact there were two different restaurant images of (possible constructed persona) EVE , & one had miraculous lipstick applied to it didn't register in your keen & 'expert' mind as suspicious?
The fact that Martin published an image of the alleged persona EVE as an infant smeared in make up did not alert you in anyway to potential child abuse networking?
The fact it was a concert for impressionable young girls (& some gaymen) involving a MPD MKUltra(ish) 'Kitten sex slave' performer isn't relevant?
Either you started the day in a foggy mood & missed the obvious signifiers in this SPECTACULAR INSULT towards the public, or have become crippled by dementia.
Or you are a useless liar Brian- who has just inadvertently outed their real position here, & shown us all what a farce your public persona is -possibly implying you are a gatekeeper of such vile exploitation, or even complicit with it yourself ?
.You misread RAMs comment Brian!
She didn't attack you in any way-
This is a very resonant question you evaded-
Can you please respond to it, thank you.
'' is EVE Hibbert a genuine person, & if so does she actually resemble the images alleged to be her in the media (which uncannily are ALL constructions as far as can be discerned)?''
I said at the start that Manchester was not my priority and if there are concerns over images in the media I will leave the Manchester experts to investigate and produce suitable evidence. I am asked below to do a deep dive into SRA. I understand why, but just how big do people think the UKC team is? I am committed to problems with the family courts and abuse cases at the moment as people can see from the latest UKC interview.
Yes, child abuse is used to control the evil parasites who run the show for their Satanic overlords. It is payment by their overlords for their brief temporal power.
Are you not aware of the RSA that is inherent in virtually every abortion clinic on the planet Brian? If not then you are basically asleep at the wheel! I know this is an extremely upsetting subject for any man or woman of good will, yourself included, and must be brought to light! We would certainly then see the cockroaches scurrying for the dark!
Dave I think you need to have a rest & reconsider your values !
Can you provide any proof it is actually Satanic?
I think you (& everyone else saying that it is Satan ) may be using the wrong term, & missing more potent 'gods' involved in genuine oppression.,
I can think of at least 3 other entities the wealthy revere far more than Satan, & that 'control' the world far more obviously than the 'medium' of TIME/SATURN, which is also the medium of ALL 'good & evil'.
I know many people who 'could be described as Satanists' in my field of work. None of them are 'evil, none abuse children that I'm aware of, all their children are smart, independent & easy going, & typically humours with kind natures. SATANISTS are primarily HEADONISTS & individualistic. How many do you know who are evil & child abusers.
"Satan" is just as fake as the other biBAAL figures. (Edit, or better they took them from earlier myths like Horus=Jesus etc.). But Satan is at least potrayed there as some kind of badass AND rebel while the others eg moses or jesus seem all to be big losers. Guess they put Satan in, to at least have a bit of excitement in their otherwise boring fantasy book (but which still loves "god" wiping out cities, killing babies and animals en masse etc)
Yes in OT Bible GOD IS AUTHOR OF ALL GOOD & EVIL, so god=devil obviously by own definitions!
Idiot Christian (not intelligent ones who do exist) say god is all powerful, then blame Satan for anything they dislike!
Of course Bible written in original form without vowels & as endless sentence, so all quotes are from guess work, translation, transliteration & transposition ! 😂😆😂
Well of course RAM I can't prove to you Satan exists. But, to me, he's as real as I am.
But whether or not you believe is not the point here. These deluded and truly evil parasites at the very top of the food chain believe, worship and take part in many rituals. Sacrificing their own children, summoning demons, etc etc. That this happens is not opinion but fact!
Yes Dave but there is no actual proof it is SATAN, except that to THEM , SATAN = TIME, not a persona.
So, anyways, what proof can you supply Satan exists as a personification/entity other than as the ARENA where all life occurs for yourslf.
Also are you (or anyone) not sacrificing children whenever you masturbate, which is what the great raconteur, humourist, adventurer & well read & creative esoteric scholar Alister Crowley was alluding to about CHILD SACRIFICE, but hysterical idiots always take as a genuine act of murder!
Attack? You are being held to account for your egregious failings as a so-called news outlet. You believe your priorities should be elsewhere. How convenient. Because you don't want your audience to find out about terror hoaxes which the government uses to restrict our freedom and speech. Out and out cowardice.
My goodness you are a grumpy leprechaun Gemma. Terror hoaxes restricting freedom and speech? What planet are you on? The government is simply stealing children from their parents through star chamber family courts, effectively assisting the abuse of children and gagging parents from speaking out about the theft. Not much freedom of speech there. Now we have the NHS believing they can take a young teenage girl from her parents to cut off her breast. And you think the Manchester event is more important? Not for me Gemma. You report Manchester and we will cover the material we think is important.
Ah Brian, your narcissistic pride is hurting. Did nobody tell you leprechauns are fake just like Manchester? You're giving us too many lols at this stage. Stick to what you're good at ie propping up the evil State, promoting rigged selections and pumping out fear porn, and leave the journalism to us. You sold your soul a long time ago. Now go and tell that to your bosses in MI5.
Leave the journalism to you? Absolutely. Now stop being grumpy and get on with your own journalism. UKC will cover the issues we think are important and we certainly won't be bullied into reporting what you or Iain think are the priorities.
Is it really possible to sell or buy souls ?
I think you're being very unfair to Brian and UKC, Gemma. They have helped bring attention to R D Hall's plight, throughout the course of the legal case against him.
They've also drawn attention to Hall's website, where anybody who wanted (until recently!) could go and discover all the evidence Hall has adduced to support his contentions about the fraudulence of the MA bombing.
Brian has every right to say he has other priorities; it doesn't make him an intelligence asset.
Everyone has limitations & strengths.
It is easy to find the faults & that is a fashion of the times & environment we are in here, yet to appreciate the good seems very out of fashion.
UK Column were a source for good information & reasoning during the start of the ConVD agenda. While Gemma has said & done some important things. Yet both of you have foibles that may undermine your integrity in the eyes of cynical observers.
What is most saddening is that the divisions just become greater with time, as if division IS the process among any critics of the oppressive Media/Gov/Corp -state machinery. This is no wonder considering the diversity of personalities, resonant topics & vested interests involved.
UK Column now appear to be treading water on many topics, UKRAINE for example is now so obviously a staged 'fake war' for the benefit of the usual arms/real estate vampires that it's is galling listening to the coverage of hysterical propaganda claims. Maybe UKC would benefit by offering more diverse views that are not editorial POLICY & flagged as such for their viewers ?
While Gemma still clings to one of the most oppressive mind control abusers in history- The Catholic Church, a 'conspiracy' most researchers would grow out trusting early on their road of 'informed awareness'.
CHURCH & STATE AGAIN exert their hold it seems?
What everyone should be aware of in this age is that the controlled opposition will give some 'good' information, yet it's aims are always to MAINTAIN the social DYNAMO of antagonism, relying on fashion, taste & conditioning to achieve that. After a time, even the most radical GENUINE opposition can become effectively controlled by external channeling around it, so the state will always win in a media environment.
Also, what we should all bear in mind is that within the control mechanisms are divergent agenda between different cells. They have different tastes in oppression, political, environmental, aesthetic, religious etc. So ,ironically one oppressor is another persons liberator.
So, Is that what this is about?🙄😁
Hi Brian - I haven't had time to read Iain's article and I'm not responding to your comment above. I'm just taking advantage of being able to ask you a couple of questions without having to pay 5 quid. I think Richard's being picked on less because of his stance on Manchester than what he revealed later on the nanotech in the jabs. I can understand why UKC doesn't want to get involved in Manchester stuff but why haven't you interviewed him on the nanotech? He was the first person who drew my attention to the subject. No actually I think it was Prof David H. Hughes. Why are you dodging the subject? Also, why did you get rid of Patrick Henningsen just after he started talking about the nanotech? The American guy you replaced him with is a frigging bore. As for Auntie Debbie & Cheryl, like they're a hundred steps behind us.
Yes, Richard Hall did try to persue an independent scientific investigation into the nanotech in the jabs...and proposed a theory about genetic manipulation..and very convincing!
''The Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) was a British pro-paedophile activist group, founded in October 1974 and officially disbanded in 1984.''
OUTED,
Now Feck Off !
🙄😂
Let's not forget RAM that it's also a dish composed of fruit, meat, cheese, or other ingredients baked over, under, or surrounded by a crust of pastry or other dough. 😎😁
Right Dave, as if that never crossed my mind! 🙄😁😂
Let us not forget, far more importantly, that this comments section is a controlled environment FULL of trolls, & the most pathetic agents ever deployed by the intelligence agencies !
Yes indeed RAM. We always get the most flak when we are right above the target
Dr Kevin McCairn has done (the lab) work on this. Debunked the nanotech stuff.
His work and that of Kevin McKernan really show (also Ethical Skeptic) what we should be focusing on.
Helluva mess due to these jabs:-(
Totally agree that the child abuse network is vastly more important than a single possibly hoaxed false flag. Expose the Network and the entire cabal would be finished forever. If people actually SAW what category A child abuse actually looks like they would be utterly horrified, never be able to get rid of those images in their heads, understand the monstrous evil that is the cabal and spend the rest of their lives trying to destroy it.
Very well said and indeed very true! Reserved and restrained citizens will easily become ferociously fierce overnight, prepared to tear limb from limb the inherently evil parasites who masquerade as benign public servants and upholders of the law, bankers, industry and business leaders, philanthropists, singers, musicians, actors, tv personalities etc etc etc. Alas, I doubt it will happen. They've been at it for centuries and remained in the shadows.
Brian, much as I loved you for waking me up to the ‘Nudge’, you’re too deep in it to trust. You’ve just proved Iain’s point, methinks. Early 2020 subscriber from Australia here. By late 2020, you were surplus to requirements.
Retardia let me get this straight. I wake you up to mind control and then you say I am too deep in it. Cognitive dissonance I think, but whatever, just follow whoever you think is telling you what you now want to hear.
I can’t be mind controlled Brian. I’m not sure why you have to pick on someone you don’t know who gave you 4 pounds a month out of dwindling finances for a year, then found it very hard to negotiate the ‘unsubscribe’ function on your website, for a reason I imagine. You’re a ‘big’ name in independent media. Go pick on someone your own size.
Yet no 'people with integrity & intuition) here trust YOU , especially with that crappy name Chronic Retardis.😂
Is that an in joke about Jody Whitticker being Doctor Who?
You're an absolute disgrace, Brian and your squad in JewK Column. You turned your back on Britain's top investigative journalist when he was being attacked on all sides by State gangsters intent on silencing him and bankrupting him. You refuse to show your audience his groundbreaking evidence because YOU are part of the State. To suggest that his investigation into Manchester is probably not the most significant piece of journalism that has been done in recent decades is to be utterly disingenuous. Fake terrorism is what the UK government uses to control the masses and invade foreign countries resulting in the deaths of countless innocent people. A five-year-old could see Manchester was a fraudulent, fake event but you are too cowardly to bring the evidence to your audience. No wonder they are leaving you in droves to follow Iain and RDH. The emperor has no clothes. You should have stayed in the Military. Oh sorry, you never left - at least it seems that way. Explain your funding!!
Stop being grumpy Gemma. Manchester is not my priority. If it is yours that is fine go away and put Manchester on the front page of your newspaper. In fact keep it there so your readers know that there is nothing more important. I will deal with other priorities like child stealing by the state.
Brian, as I tried to highlight in the piece, while you have diligently pieced together various strand of evidence of how the state exploits paedophilia to control assets and MP's and so on, engagement on that large topic requires prolonged audience engagement.
In highlighting the Manchester evidence I am certainly not suggesting that we should ignore things like child abuse, or the climate scam, or other false flag events, manipulated conflicts and all the other awful things the state does in order to manipulate us.
UK Column has often said that it wants to reach out to what James Delingpole calls "normies." And that is why I think the Manchester evidence is so important and strategically useful.
It is damning of the state, in my view, but does not require the audience to engage with lengthy in depth analysis to understand it. They can simply be shown a hoaxed false flag being run in real time. Again, I return to my point that a short, punchy segment could really breakthrough, in my opinion.
But I realise you do not think this evidence is convincing and do not want to report it for that reason. I am not intending to publish anything else asking you to do so. But out of interest, may I again ask what part of the evidence you do not find convincing? Perhaps I have overlooked something, so I would value your observations.
Iain,
You have said that you would value my observations, so here they are.
Will readers please note that this will be my last comment in Iain's substack goldfish bowl on this issue. I may choose to discuss and comment further elsewhere.
Before I forget Iain, I look forward to that conversation with you as proposed.
My observations on this matter.
Iain, you say that you think the "Manchester evidence is so important and strategically useful." You think "that the [public] audience does not need to engage in lengthy in depth analysis to understand it" and "the evidence is damning." You think that the public "can be shown a hoaxed false flag being run in real time." You think that a short, punchy piece could really [be a] breakthrough."
My observation is that you think a lot, but your approach is unbelievably simplistic. It is academic rather than pragmatic. Do you seriously believe that the 'evidence' as it is, will convice a public that simply doesn't care about a whole host of other major issues? Do you seriously believe Manchester is still more important to everyone than anything else? Really?
In addition, it is very clear to me that you like the idea that you are right, whilst attacking anyone who dares to disagree with you. Yet that is the very style of free speech control that we are all supposed to be fighting.
You could have called to discuss the issue and your concerns. Instead you went for the Iain Davis video limelight with a hit piece on UKC and me in person, promoted in your best interest on your substack of course. As I have already said it helps nobody, but well done, the poisonous attacks and infighting in the comments are increasing.
The wordy pages of 'evidence' that you sent to me regarding Manchester were overwhelmingly blurred and weakened by your opinion on what Richard D Hall had said and your commentary. Evidence is not commentary and opinion.
I actually think that what you provided to me was the poorest analysis that you have written to date and I acknowledge that you have written some really good stuff for the UKColumn.
And to be crystal clear, I am now sharing my opinion here of your work, not an opinion of Richard D Hall's work.
I absolutely disagree with your opinion that Manchester is the most important event and that we must all support you, and do as you think and say, because then we can achieve a breakthrough.
There are many different ways of skinning the stasi state cat. You've written the book, surely with all the evidence that you have written, that is enough for your assured breakthrough. Have the courage of your literary conviction. And work with the Light newspaper in Ireland as they will surely have Manchester on their front page for every edition from here on.
Meanwhile, I have now lost another hour, and whilst you give casual lipservice to the subject of child abuse and child stealing, I am on the case dealing with some utterly broken parents. Victims of the state underworld that I absolutely believe can run Manchester events and deny justice in court.
If you believe Manchester is the silver bullet go for it. Support Richard D Hall, raise money to help pay the huge greedy legal fees and shout out to the world. But just stop trying to pressure me and the UKC because I dare not to agree with your thoughts, opinions and priorities. Your technique is passive aggressive bullying and I am unlikely to be swayed by it.
Kind Regards
Brian G
I asked for your observations on the Manchester evidence as you said you did not find it convincing. As you know, I am convinced by it but I also know I might be wrong so wondered if you saw something I hadn't or had a perspective on it I could learn something from.
With regards to the offered conversation I look forward to discussing how UK Column proposes to report the evidence of the Manchester hoax. I have asked for you to specify the purpose of the meeting and await your reply. If it is not to discuss the reporting the evidence than, in regard to this specific matter, I will respectfully decline as I don't know what the purpose of the meeting is.
This far, your offered observation on the Manchester evidence is that I think a lot of things about it, that my approach is simplistic, evidence won't convince the public, that I think Manchester is more important than anything else, that you are upset that I didn't call you, that I wrote a hit piece on you and UKC, that I sent you wordy pages of evidence--which constituted poor analysis--reiterating again that I think Manchester is more important than anything, that my book alone and my Substack articles should achieve the audience breakthrough I've suggested and that I think I am right and attack everyone who disagrees with me.
Sorry, but that doesn't leave me any wiser about what you think about the Manchester evidence. I know you don't find it convincing but I have no idea why. You have a clearly stated view on it so I assume you are familiar with it. I'm not going to bother asking you about it again. Just like the legacy media and the High Court, it appears to be something you can't discuss Brian. If I'm wrong, please tell me why you do not find the evidence convincing.
I doubt you will read this as I have addressed some of the points you have raised once again elsewhere in this thread and you've ignored them and have continued to make your unfounded allegations. But just to reiterate, the only thing I sent you was a single copy of my book. I have not sent you anything else. I have not written a "hit piece" on you or UK Column and I have never said that I consider Manchester more important than anything else. Your strange claim seem like deflection to me. Clearly you are happy to criticise me and that's fine. The only criticism I have made of you or UK Column is that you haven't reported the Manchester evidence and "I think" you are missing an opportunity in not doing so.
I am a relatively unknown journalist who has reached out to the bigger platforms because "I think" Hall's case has set a precedent for the censorship of all independent media, including UK Column. The whole edifice of the state's case against Hall is based upon their denial of the evidence he reported. Therefore, the whole point of the piece I wrote, hopefully constructively criticising UK Column and other independent media outlets, is that by not reporting the evidence you are allowing that dictatorial process to proceed without challenging it in the most obvious way: report the evidence that the state dare not acknowledge.
Clearly it would be helpful if the bigger outlets reported that evidence. That's why I wrote it.
You keep talking about pointless division, how the antagonism you claim to exist doesn't help and so on. Yet, when a smaller independent journalist who used to contribute to your platform tries to encourage you to report an absolutely blood vital story you respond by claiming offence when none was given, deflect by attacking them and persistently evade giving straight answers to straight questions.
Weird.
Through reasons of my health reducing the time I get to keep on top of things I am most apologetic for being very late to this conversation (I can't think what to call it) between Iain and Brian.
I am sickened to see Brian squirming around with mealy mouthed comments trying to make snide put-downs of Iain and avoid answering the question in hand. It is not a surprise, sadly, as this was his method in trying to demean those of us who were flabbergasted at the untruth Ben Rubin whined forth about Richard D Hall on the UK Column News, while subtlety implying what a fine chap he himself was. We were pointing out that a lie had been broadcast and needed rectifying, whereupon Brian demeaned us by saying we 'all thought Richard was a Saint' and tried to make us sound stupid.
It was this snake in the grass comment of Ben Rubin’s and the subsequent reaction to it from the management that brought my doubts about the ethos of UKC to a head. Are they really what they say? It’s very convenient to boast chivalry in rescuing children and restoring them to their ill-treated parents when ‘the State’ had snatched them as we are told, because we cannot assess the effectiveness or quantity of this noble work, neither dare we ask anything since it is by nature so delicate and confidential. Sadly, my work from which I am now retired, showed me that such interventions as those Brian hints he is involved in, do not have a high degree of success and – the reason I came across the victims – often lead to greater suffering for which the poor people involved need support in order to simply cope with life, often because the ‘help’ has been administered without the professionalism and expertise such human suffering demands.
The battle in UKC over why it did not cover Richard’s excellent Journalism or show any of his work, produced some astounding insights concerning the basis upon which the Column is run. For example, I happened to mention that you, Iain had been moved to open a forum to say goodbye to us when you were told by the UKC they no longer wanted you (to write). I referred to this, while mentioning Richard, saying you said some very kind things then quoting you -thus explained you’d been told they no longer wanted you to be a contributing writer.
The response I received from the Boss, Mike, to my simple post, was to call me a liar, I think that he wrote ‘This is an absolute lie!’ or words to that effect. I did not crawl back in apology but simply showed my evidence for my words.
This is where we learn that methods and thought processes at the Column are different from most places I have encountered. Mike told me I did not know what had happened. He said ‘You should not write about something you do not know about’. But if UKC don’t tell you – how do you know you do not know? Anyway, apparently, it was not what I had read on UKC.
I asked how were we to know what we had read was not what had happened? If we were not told differently to what was printed on the Column, we would not know differently.
His reply? He told me ‘You should have asked’!!
You see? It works like this;
If something is said or printed on UKC, no, - anything printed/said on UKC, - you must not think you now know what it tells you. If you think it is simply saying what it says and you want to reply to it or talk about it or quote it, DON’T!
YOU MUST ASK MANAGEMENT FIRST! They will tell you what to say – what it really should say.
This is because what you have read does not mean you know what you have read. And you must not write about what you do not know and of course, you do not know that you do not know it.
That is the UK Column logic behind how to respond to anything on a forum or anywhere on the site.
What I learned was, Brian and Mike will not support Richard. Something blocks them. Something about the ‘Manchester Arena Bomb’ throws them into a complete frenzy of fear and dread. Something has them in a vice-like grip over it. To quote a popular image, it causes them the biggest knicker twist you could imagine. And sets us off imagining why.
Any kind of discussion about why the Column has fallen down on its own principles regarding Richard’s excellent work on Manchester and why they won’t stand up for a highly moral fellow Investigative Journalist, or similarly, not give even two minutes air time to illustrate the huge anomalies regarding Manchester which he so powerfully explains, causes them to implode. They would not even just show a couple of the most cogent pictures taken within 4 minutes of the bang of the pristine Merchandise stall and sprightly running woman who claimed to have a bolt go through and through her leg, or how the ‘bomb’ was described and how a real one would have looked and sounded…
They will not say why. Brian comes out with stupid remarks and makes slurs on those of us who regard both Richard and the Manchester event as important. For example, Brian says,
'The real issue here is that to Richard D Hall and Iain, the Manchester bombings are the most important thing in the world.' He knows it is not true. It is not the real issue and they do not think that. He is belittling them and the subject. He does this all the time. He is trying to demean Iain and Richard and take the readers' minds off the fact that he and UKC will not be honest about the Manchester 'bomb' nor about Richard. There is something about the subject that really frightens them. They have a Junior whom they primed to put a slur on Richard’s good name to just show that UKC is not connected to Richard’s work even though they are bountiful enough to have offered him charity (a bit of free membership) when he fell on hard times but they make is clear it was through not being perfect and of course they don’t do things the way he does.
We got the message Brian. And when you wouldn’t be honest and were still demeaning us for pointing out a lie, you brought up that you missed Poppy, your dog that died, just so we couldn’t keep telling you to correct the lie about Richard!
The message that came out reveals UKC are not who they say they are and might have any kind of weird or wonderful motivations or connections. Who knows? They tossed around the idea that Richard was really working for the BBC or MI5, (not the motorway) and we all know people accuse their enemy of the crimes of which they themselves are guilty.
Thanks Iain for all you do. You are a diamond.
I will answer one last time and it is a very easy reply. You think Iain, that it is an "absolutely blood vital story." I do not think it is an "absolutely blood vital story" and particularly not at the moment with events as they are in the world. There are other priorities. What is weird is that you simply cannot understand my opinion and why I am giving it, but then you never bothered to speak to me about the matter in the first place. Clearly you also have great difficulty in understanding that 1. You may just be wrong in what you think and 2. You still think that by carefully crafted passive aggressive attacks you can get your way. Has your approach helped Richard D Hall? Personally I do not think so. For me your approach has now absolutely poisoned the Manchester cup and I have better things to do than waste more time on this exchange. I suggest again that you get the Irish Light newspaper to run your "absolutely blood vital story" front page and centre pages monthly from here on. Your substack on Manchester will do the rest. Kind Regards Brian G
Regarding stealing children Brian, could the UK Column do a deep, deep dive into what is then done with the stolen children. The main one being for Ritual Satanic Abuse, who was and is involved at the highest levels of public influence, before this relatively easy to find information disappears down the memory hole.
Dave if you have started the investigation, keep going and share the information. A deep deep dive is hours of work and we are a very small team. I am already at capacity with child stealing and talking to abuse surivors. And yes ritualistic stuff comes to the surface in that. We need help, not the regular cry of why can't the UKC do this or that. Many hands make light work.
But you have time to cover out and out bullshit every day?
Because David Carrpet is paid for being insufferable bore. crippled with hypocrisy ?
Maybe he is here because in real life has a face like prolapsed anus regurgitating yesterdays meal?
Ok Brian, that's a fair comment. I've been researching RSA and the who, where, when and why of it all for over twenty years.
I'm sure you've heard the myth about never being more than six feet away from a rat. Well we know it's not true and was probably an exaggeration or misconception of the facts. Well If I was to say that RSA is utterly pervasive in the West and the higher up the food chain we go, the more prevalent it becomes it would be a far more accurate, truthful and sound statement.
No one cares Dave, you admit you obsess about satanic ritual abuse, propelling you on 'Deep Dives' down your grubby 'memory hole' here like gloating pervert aflame with gaslighting BS.
Why would MR Garrish care what you have fantasy about for 20 years !?😂
Dave I think you need to have a rest & reconsider your values !
Fortunately I take no offense whatsoever from your vain attempts to insult and upset.
I find your hateful scorn and barely hidden Jealousy amidst your inane rants and musings and your failing attempts to convey shock and awe to your self perceived audience that you truly believe are locked in enthralled beguilement to be the epitome of self aggrandisement and vainglorious delusion.
Your seething hatred and hostility that your words try to transmit invariably lack substance and depth therefore they will rarely, if ever, instill injury, but much more importantly, the strong emotional reaction that for some reason must build and reinforce your desperate and grasping need for these feelings of superiority, great self worth and importance.
You are an archetypal narcissist displaying all the traits and symptoms and are suffering with one of the worst types of this personality disorder I've ever come across.
No one cares Dave,
you are shit & it is obvious.
Is that what excites you David ?
You really love dreaming of satanists & abusers doing unimaginable evil, & to know all disgusting grisly details, with a DEEP DIVE ?!
Your words give you away David= 'relatively easy to find information disappears down the memory hole.''
Since when has it been easy to find unless an abuser in the club like yourself maybe?
why do you use such overt Freudian sexual terms like DEEP DIVE into your MEMORY HOLE 🙄😂😆😂
Dave I think you need to have a rest & reconsider your values !
Dave , brother of serial abuser Maxine ?
You seem very obsessed with 'satanic ritual abuse' so I wonder how many cases of that have been proven compared to CHRISTIAN/CATHOLIC abuse that have been provable? (I will leave evil Muslim rings & Buddhist rapists out of this for now)
Also I wonder if 'satanists' ONLY really exist as inversion of CHRISTIAN ideology ?
When you're in a glasshouse, it's never a good idea to start chuckling pebbles around. https://roguemale.org/2024/12/03/episode-68-the-glass-menagerie/#more-4898
[2nd comment] Following on from 1st comment, I would also venture that the child abuse network (as a talking point) is the real 'litmus test' for whether someone is controlled opposition or not. Similar applies to the related MK-Ultra. Notwithstanding the possibility that they don't yet know anything about it or haven't done any research etc. But if they do know about it and studiously avoid talking about it then they are almost certainly controlled opposition.
The reason being it's the great vulnerability for the cabal because every normal person is instinctively protective towards children, and if the knowledge was widespread then it would bring down the cabal in one fell swoop. So it's understandable that controlled opposition would avoid it. Likewise it's predictable they'd come up with something like Qanon to discredit it (similar with the 'false memory syndrome' people).
Maybe Iain hasn't gotten round to it yet (or he has but I missed it somehow), but at least he hasn't gotten involved with the anti-trans cult. That's another dead giveaway, that one.
So Iain only critiques the UKC now that he's N0T "part of the UKColumn literary team"?
Brian, you've said (paraphrasing) "We aim our content at "Middle England"" & on the "virus existence question" you said (paraphrasing again) "I think that our audience is not ready & would be put off by this subject",
It was arrogant for the UKC to assume they have the right to determine what their public is or is not ready to hear, but in doing so have proved they view their audience as children. Note that I have not used the words; "Gatekeeper", "Controlled 0pposition" or "Censorship".
Andy a team player could have given Mike or I a call and discussed this, but no that was too difficult, so here we are wasting time on social media.
You have misquoted me. UKC has often said that we speak to middle England. That means we try and take people who know little but MSM propaganda and get them started on the steps to wider uinformation and understanding. Not to throw all theories and evidence on every subject. That is common sense not arrogance and is one of the reasons we have been able to engage with so many professional people.
"Give you a call"? C'mon there were enough UKC members requesting the issue of "no virus found" be adressed & even Patrick Henningson wasn't allowed to mention the subject whilst presenting the Column.
Anyway remember this? https://odysee.com/@northerntracey:a/UK-Column-Live---Interview-with-Dr-Patrick-Quanten1:a
I'll leave the final word to Henningson "Anyone (in the truth/health freedom movement) who refuses to address the issue regarding the lack of scientific evidence for the existence of viruses as a pathogenic entity is effectively saying;"well...the way to get to the truth, is to not tell the truth, because that's gonna get us to the truth".....& at some point they're not gonna be trusted anymore!"
Nice try Andy. We are talking about Manchester Arena in the first instance, not viruses, but yes Iain as a team player could have picked up the phone. He didn't. The virus issue is a completely different story and yes I remember Patrick Quanten well and am still in contact. We disagree on approach and are still friends. Not sure where Patrick fits in. What he says is correct ..."the lack of scientific evidence." But we are discussing Manchester!!
They can't go there. They're controlled op intelligence assets. They need to keep driving the fear into the sheep who are foolish enough to still watch them. They knew from the outset there was no virus but chose to ignore. Look at the buffoon they interview on the 9/11 scam with the twin towers sticking out of his head. They're laughing at you from GCHQ.
Yeah, the "controlled op intelligence assets" thing was a hard pill to swallow, it wasn't their "news" that got me scratching my head, but UKC members in the forum!
I concocted a reply to Brian but it seems our wires are crossed (& as there's plenty of other people here giving him a piece of their mind...) so won't bother posting, however the final sentence reads;.... "IM0 the UKC does not pursue things with consistency, and only up to the point allowed by the limits of an agenda."
Can I ask what happened to SWILLIAMSON ?
I doubt I will get a response for this, it seems a very sensitive topic.
We would like to know too. The story was that he got a new job that was not tourism based and he could not give time to he excellent investigative reports. But I would like to know where he is.
He is very rude man to not tell subscribers all this time.
I see many lost souls begging for his guidance & fantasising he is dead from reboilers of extinction or likewise.
In fact it is maybe evil to act as he has just before the COV(ert)ID horrors.
Were you and Ben being team players when you floated the idea that RDH was controlled opposition?
Have any of the 'professional people' grown a pair yet and spoken out, even to their own personal detriment? If not then you may be targeting the wrong audience.
John 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
There are lots of professional people speaking in out and usually they suffer for it. UKC has spoken with and interviewed many of these people. Search the website. We need to encourage each and every one because they have the knowledge to help expose and challenge their own professional encampments.
Grow a pair ?
Are you referring to John of Patmos when he wrote of CHRIST WITH PAPS ?!
''And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle."''Revelation 1:13 (KJV):
Yes, St John the Evangelist. Growing a pair is a common phrase meaning to find courage or bravery when facing danger.
British vernacular paps and its Greek definition are not the same.
Mastos: the breast, Original Word: μαστός, Transliteration: Mastos, Phonetic Spelling: (mas-tos'), Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine, Short Definition: the breast, Meaning: the breast. Always Pleased to enlighten.
Dave , brother of Maxine serial killer ?
But I have old book of esoteric tantra that shows the CHRIST WITH PAPS !
You admit PAPS=BREASTS & that is what is stated & shown.
So here you just fussy pussy arguing but making admission!
Do you say 'Yes, but no,'' ''No, but yes'' etc when you talk to people in real life?🙄😂😆😂
Oh for goodness sake Brian, what a disappointing response 😞
Iain's work is outstanding here, as is Richard's of course.
Limited hangout comes to mind, sadly...why I quit supporting UK Column.
Thanks Pauline, appreciated. It was not my intention to provoke UK Column's anger and the response from Brian Gerrish surprised me. Some people have requested that I make the video available for sharing on Odysee and I have now updated it and posted it on Odysee.
Anyone interested can watch and share it from Odysee: - https://odysee.com/@InThisTogether:d/Manchester-Attack-Independent-Media-Failure:1
Or they can view the corresponding Substack post here: - https://iaindavis.substack.com/p/the-controlled-controlled-opposition-014
Brian's exact words:
"The comment focus (on Iain's substack) is not on the people and mechanisms working to attack us, our families and society, but on who in ‘the movement’ is a bad’un. The poisonous suspicion circulates and grows amongst people who should be supporting each other to give a united strength against the evil state mechanisms destroying our lives. Be it by propaganda and false flag attacks or by stealing our children."
Yet, Ben Rubin was given free rein, unchallenged, to speculate about the possibility of R D Hall being an agent on a UKC broadcast, only a week or two ago.
This sort of hypocrisy doesn't help anyone, does it, Brian?
Cowardice & arrogance .That's what has been displayed by most in the alternative media.
Some commentators in particular disappointed me greatly, with there 'too clever by half ' reasoning . Richard's life has been destroyed, so they should have at least some evidence of the 'asset' argument before even suggesting it. The whole thing has been extremely disheartening. Egos at large & hardly any support for such a courageous man .
B.t.w. I have made it primary study of mine to recognise the signs & symbols (often masonic in origin) that controlled opposition invariably display & Richard has never, ever, communicated any .
I did my bit on a forum I belong too & the cowardice fuelled silence there was an eye opener too.
Well done Iain for having the bollocks & decency to work so hard .
There really is no 'truther movement ' that's patently clear.
So many should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, the way this whole thing has panned out .
It really has shocked, staggered & saddened me.
What about his stag ring?
What about his 'tell' of the mutilated little finger bending backwards from certain initiations?
What of the fact his brother was/is a policeman?
What of his potentially 'Satanic' bearded features?
What of the object strategically placed around his studio,
& what of all his overtly masonic guests?
lols.
Light-paper just OUT themselves as MASONIC stooge distraction, agitation & data mining front by being snide & smug over serious comment worth considering.
Thank you lightpaper cretin account for making us all aware at how rubbish your mind is, while resorting to typical tactics & evasion.
I ask seriously to you oh, so clever , snobs: What is HALLS connection to SPRING BBC Bitch proven by STAG RING ? When you know you would not snicker like children in sugar rush then , & instead will be slapping faces in shame of arrogant stupidity !🙄😂😆😂
ALSO, WTF does 'lols' mean = laugh out loud's, when LOL would suffice, or better yet learn to use EMOJI you pathetic inept goon 😂
some of us are out there doing serious work raising awareness to the general public.
some are in here just being cnts, and it's pathetic.
'What of his potentially 'Satanic' bearded features?'
lolz.
Yes you are pathetic anal kunt lightweight paper.🙄😂🤣😂
Keep tROTTING ABOUT being obvious shill pony,
some of us have done real investigation in life, while you just parasite other peoples ideas & work,
what have you ever done that is original ? Nothing. It is all already known.
What of his POTENTIALLY satanic features is obvious JOKE among serious point! 🙄😂🤣 that is why POTENTIALLY was used I think.
You prove you are not fit to differentiate tone of voice in writing & confuse humour as psychosis, so must be psychotic yourself, with brain of infant !
It's more pathetic that you are so terminally deluded , can't write 'cunt' even though an adult, (seriously) use cunt as a derogatory word, while behaving as a twitchy little prick trying to type with someone else's useless tool.
I love how you call yourself after Lucifer & let everyone know your a thin veneer for Masonic concerns, Maybe generations of incest does that to arrogant & degenerating minds though?
Isn't all Journalism investigative?
How else to get a story?
Why a separate sect of investigators?.
Shouldn"t all journalists investigate first contemplate then write.
No, sadly, most is simply GOSSIP,
There are too many errors , omissions & distractions in this & the 'film' to begin rectifying it.
One is worth highlighting now though.
David Scott made good points for example, except again he reinforces the idea of 'silencing' rather than 'intimidating'. However,he also falls short by not being aware of the Hall Bombing Hoax Overview. How long would that take, a few hours of watching some potent videos!
The crux of this many layered MISDIRECTION GAME is to make us imagine a threat is a fact- the threat being silencing & legal penalisation,
While it is 'really' a cognitive conditioning phantasm employed to intimidate free expression ( via an artificially constructed consensus morality/legality ).
What Iain & others evade is the probability the court action was Theatre, not a valid legal president, except as a SPECTACLE of such. If so the nature of Iains argument is more a tedious ramble around already well trodden territory.
In fact I'm amazed at the lack of proper 'research methodologies' that have been applied to this overt fiasco. Who has managed to endure reading HIBBERTS 'incredible & unbelievable' BOOK for example? Who has ever verified Eve Hibberts existence, or non existence?
Only the most slug-like minds didn't realise Manchester was another ludicrous 'Constructed Event' as soon as the iffy footage was shown in most cases. We were all media bombarded with similar events every few months before ConVD , then they suddenly ceased.
Hall never convinced hardly anyone who wasn't already AWARE it was a hoax event.
I think the nuts & bold of this construct are now well worn & instead more fruit can be found with the SYMBOLISM involved, something that is conceded as intrinsic with this , yet always skipped over, or diminished with a shallow bigoted prejudice.
Lastly (for now...!) is this useless drunken idea of a 'The controlled controlled opposition psyop psyop' ..... Just use some punctuation for a start ! ......then a sober mind would realise it is an absurd way of saying ''Puppet Plants''
'Hall never convinced hardly anyone who wasn't already AWARE it was a hoax event.'
I have to disagree RAM. I believe Richard has indeed convinced many sleeping citizens and fence sitters alike. You very well may be guilty of believing that everyone has, or should have, your innate levels of intuition.
Thanks for that Dave, is it something you can verify though?
Also I 'believe' nothing & admit I either KNOW or SPECULATE about matters.
As the great ancient saying goes- 'BELIEVE NOTHING, EVERYTHING PERMUTES'
I believe there are fundamental truths are are undeniable. Everything else can be said to be opinion.
Yes you KNOW or you SPECULATE
It is impossible for you to agree & give credit isn't it Dave brother of Maxine the serial abuser ?
I have been guilty many times of expecting my family and closet friends to understand things that I consider to be quite explicit and elementary.
This is certainly not always the case. They have not been able to rely on their intuition alone, but have needed to see loads of primary sources of evidence, or "facts", to convince them of the reality that I want to share.
What were you saying Dave, no one seems to care?
🙄😂🤣😂😆😂
Who encouraged the 'Hall is a bit of a twat really' idea? You Iaini, by lack of action , pacifist hypocrisy with ProLIES team here, then with interviews with two rubbish little witches with big spoons for stirring.
You make me laugh at evasions, denials & now whimpering like wounded animal who has gnawed its own paws off due to starvation of common sense & integrity.
'Do unto others as they would do unto you'
or
'Do unto others before they would do unto you'
maybe misquote , but far more useful advice?
Again thankyou for this.
Though to boil it down I would qoute, as you do, Dr David Hughes - "It is sufficient to look at the primary, observable evidence, which Hall [has] presented".
That's it.
The rest is psyop on psyop on controlled opposition on psyop.
Use your discernment and don't get involved in the fog that the state creates.
"... psyop on psyop on controlled opposition on psyop..." LOL wut? Care to explain what this gibberish means?
Puppet Plants ?
🙄😂🤣😂
Here another SHILL found one "ceLIA(r) Farber" pushing the Füllmeine Taschen theater as real and Fmich as some hero, how dumb can one be??? See comment there: https://celiafarber.substack.com/p/the-ongoing-dehumanization-and-abuse/comments?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=post_viewer
I wanted poster "Artdodger" to explain his post and not u. Also ur reply has the PP the cabal loves
What PP ?
That is very moody reply Frank, but you usually always decent:
ArtyFartyDodger can still respond you know 🙄😁
It mean Artdogger is idiot who is confused with words ?
Brian Gerrish replied my post but I seem to be unable to respond as when I try to post this isn't happening? I'm therefore posting my reponse here:
Brian, I think you know full well that the criticisms of UKC’s coverage of the Manchester hoax do not originate with how it reported the case of RDH after this court case began. Iain’s criticism of UKC’s coverage goes back to when Richard broadcast his first Manchester documentary in 2020. Whether people believe “Manchester is the most important event in the world” (as you write in your slightly mocking tone) this does not excuse you and UKC from responsibility to show or at least describe RDH’s wealth of evidence showing Manchester to be a hoax. The diversionary tactic you have employed by talking about the importance of child abuse as an excuse for not fully engaging with Manchester doesn’t wash. No one who wants the evidence of the Manchester hoax disseminated as widely as possible is downplaying the very serious and evil phenomenon of child abuse and I find this implied assertion distasteful. I also find your baseless claim that “You [i.e. me] like many people assume that we have never helped or sought to help Richard D, Hall” an unnecessary presumption and more damningly an attempt to evade the main criticism contained within Iain’s video wherein your limited support for RDH’s legal rights in relation to his court case is acknowledged. The criticism as I think you understand clearly - but are studiously choosing to ignore - is about supporting Richard’s evidence-based research which proves that Manchester was indeed a hoax. As Iain points out, had you shown this evidence the ‘dangerous environment’ you predicted as far back as 2018 might have been more robustly challenged and the efforts of the state to claim that there is no evidence of a hoax at the Manchester Arena would have been exposed. This is the support Iain suggests UKC might have given. Finally, you repeatedly state that Manchester is not your ‘priority’. This may be the case and of course UKC is entitled to produce what it wants to produce. Outside the ‘UKC News’ and ‘Extra’ you have produced numerous programmes some of which are of great value, others less so, but are you seriously saying that since 2020 all of the work the UKC Team has done has been more important than exposing the Manchester hoax? If your answer to this question is ’yes’ I think people will conclude that there are more damning reasons as why you avoid doing so and this has nothing to do with time or claims about more important ‘priorities’
I've had the same problem. Thanks to Blue Sky Maiden for this fix.
1. Write your full comment.
2. Cut and save it in your clipboard.
3. Type a place holder "**" or "nn" or something and then post the comment where you want to post it.
4. Once posted edit the comment and replace the placeholder with your pasted full comment, then save the updated comment and it should be posted where you intended to post it.
Please delete 3 of repeated responses as you look like desperate troll in anal wallpaper frenzy ! thank you,
Also Brian did write HALL DID NOT WANT TO BE COVERED BY THEM !!!!
''All very well Mark but Richard D Hall asked us not to report from the time of his court case. He then hosted people attacking us''
As for unable to reply faff I will post how to resolve in comments above you.
I searched for my post after I posted it and could not find it, there seemed to be technical issues preventing the post so I kept trying. I will of course delete previous attempts at posting if I can locate these
"Also Brian did write HALL DID NOT WANT TO BE COVERED BY THEM !!!!"
RDH may have been advised by his counsel not to make public statements or to be seen as encouraging others to do so during the trial (this is speculation on my part) but as I state in my post Iain correctly identifies that UKC understood the importance of the Manchester Hoax from at least 2020, so from this point up to the start of the trial they had ample opportunity to support Richard by disseminating his evidence in a way that would certainly have been welcomed by him.
It is easy usually if you go to comments bubble & it says NEWEST, click that & all 4 will be together. Other option is most popular & oldest.
thanks for the info, it's appreciated
The Manchester story needs to be told, and Richard D Hall has been doing brilliant truth journalism for 15 years.
But it is not the silver bullet; neither is the fact that viruses don't cause disease, climate change is the weather, vaccines only maim and kill, 9/11 was an inside job and nobody has ever been to the moon. Yet each of those hoax proponents will tell you that if only the public knew about it, they would see all the other deceptions and then the cabal would fall.
I'm willing to bet that almost everyone has a unique 'waking up' story - and the final straw that nudged you into really researching everything you have been told will be different.
So having an alternative media is vital to disseminate missing information - but they are INDEPENDENT James Corbett said of the criticism of what he doesn't cover - "it's called the Corbett Report - i decide what i investigate and publish, nobody else."
Slagging off people for not covering a particular topic does not help anyone. But it does encourage division, as evidenced by the comments.
Let's all spend time naval-gazing and arguing instead of alerting the public to the fact the rulers are trying to kill us. That's the psyop.
Peace.
The articles and the video have been published because slagging people off, publicly speculating they might be COINTEL without any evidence or even logical reason for doing so, for example, is, as you say, "divisive" and unhelpful. I specifically discussed exactly this in the two pieces and I pointedly stated I was not accusing anyone of being controlled opposition.
Like 9/11, 7/7 the Covid and climate scams, etc., Manchester is not the "silver bullet." But again, as pointed out in the articles, it stands apart from these other events and issues because of the clear, practically irrefutable primary observable evidence of the hoax being perpetrated in real time.
Unlike other false flag attacks we do not need to analyse a large body of evidence to expose the fraud. With Manchester the most damning evidence can be packaged into a short, punchy news item.
Surely the dissemination of information or raising awareness is not the only purpose of the independent media? It is also to stand against tyranny and, again, this is another reason why the Manchester evidence stands apart.
Hall was prosecuted for no reason because the Establishment wanted to hide that evidence. So scared is the Establishment of this evidence that it dare not even admit that it exists.
Hall's trial has set a case precedent to shout down investigative journalism using fabricated harassment claims and as a basis for further legislation to ostensibly end free speech.
Again, showing or reporting the Manchester evidence undermines the basis for the ruling in Hall's case and, therefore, practically destroys the alleged foundation of the planned censorship regime. It shows "conspiracy theorists" are not deranged subversives but, in fact, ordinary rational people with good reason to question the state.
Yet, instead of seizing this opportunity, all I hear from the leading independent media outlets are the reasons not to show the evidence. I wrote the articles and made the video to try to explain why we must show the evidence.
I cannot force and certainly would not demand that other outlets show the evidence but I did want to make the argument to encourage them to do so.
You encouraged us - an edit of your first part will be on page 6 of next month's The Light, along with a big picture of the city room photo (the unpixellated one, though it's stil terrible quality - another false flag giveaway..)
But i agree with you; others won't, and i wouldn't spend any time worrying about it enough to call out anyone in particular, or even the movement as a whole.
We all have limited time and resources, and so must focus on whatever moves us individually. I'm pretty sure God evenly distributes the tasks and topics across all those He has caused to see through the deceptions of the world and motivated to speak loudly about.
Peace.
Hi "the Lightpaper" please don't use the Parker photo. Most people who look at it think it looks like a bomb scene. There are much better images to use which do clearly show fakery. Let me know if you want the article I suggested and I'll send you some with it.
Thanks Darren (I assume.) Rather than edit my post do I have time to write you a 1000 words just to briefly lay out and highlight why the Manchester evidence is so unique and important? Let me know if you have a deadline I can get something to you in the next couple of days if that's acceptable for you.
Possibly one of the most uptight , uninformed & triggered people I've ever discussed 'conspiracy's' with was a main Light Newspaper vendor in Sheffield,
The jerk there didn't even acknowledge NASA were a maya machine of funding vampirism. I don't see what you're achieving apart from churning out fodder for the same old endless fear, misery & impotency factory.
It NEEDS to be divisive- as you lot are a conceited clump of shallow poseurs most of the time, like a bunch of smug grub 6th formers busy polishing your prefect badges & stroking your boils.
Look at the state of you all & get a fukn' grip ! MiriMi the posh mediocre poseur with behavioural studies daddy, Assling O'psycho the unbelievable hysteric actress- shes done it all & knows ALL THE PLAYERS don't you know, from weather girl to fashion news, madness is her currency. Then there was your breath taking hypocrisy & flirting with the PRO-LIES mental case & MPD 'SPY FROM ANOTHER DIMENSION' (her arse) EverLyin' Bumsick.
Really Iain, you had an opportunity for a great informed comments section, but due to cowardice or compromise have made yourself a clown in a shoddy little circus.
Nobody can be told the true nature of the system, they have to see it for themselves. They have to want to find the truth.
But, once they see it, then what?
That's where most of us are.
I've seen a few potential "movements" come and go, Monetary reform ~30yrs ago, usurped from within by "global warming" nonsense; Occupy, usurped from within by "climate change" nonsense; Peak Oil (real phenomena or manufactured doesn't matter the movement had legs) usurped from within by "Climate change nonsense. Permaculture, again usurped by "climate change" nonsense, although it spawned RegenAg, which has legs now, and there's some resistance to the climate nonsense as a lot of leading proponents reject the CC meme because they understand the carbon cycle, the system is trying to real it in with monetary temptations in the form of carbon credits, but there's still potential to at least fix the food system.
We know the problems, but what is the solution?
‘But, once they see it, then what?’ you change your life step by step so that you become a shining light of hardly using the system and living well and prosperously. everyone’s path is different, but it’s those things that make you excited and daunted at the same time.
The people did not defeat the soviet union. They went around it - black/free markets etc.
Economy first, because no-one cares about politics if they need to eat. Peace.
So you are overtly & openly Lucifarian then?
Does that not trigger a lot of religious bigots ?
Thank YOU Iain.
Is it a precondition to be either drunk or on prescription to write so badly on this page?
It was a psyop, Hall exposed it further with evidence, the controllers want him and us cancelled.
The court case was risible and redolently corrupt.
Iain spoke with other 'truthers' who had other opinions, it's known as argument and communication.
NOW ALL GO BACK TO SLEEP
Where you drunk or on prescription to write that JAT ?
🙄😂
no l was torturing a kitten in my microwave
😶
no l was worshipping the satanic Jesus phuckwit
😶
have you really nothing else better to do, like make an appointment at the assisted dying clinic?
Probably the most important video of the last 10 years. Profound in its insight and implications, this is a devastating critique of the 'independent media' by Iain in relation to Richard D. Hall's overwhelming and compelling evidence that the Manchester Arena event is indeed one of the biggest political scandals ever perpetrated by the British state. I fear that if they don't heed his call to share RDH's evidence with their audiences (rather than merely voicing limited dissent over the supression of his rights to fully defend himself at the High Court) then they will suffer considerable damage in the eyes of those wanting to fight the abuse of power by the state in this country.
OMG , MW (masonic shill name) learn to connect your over heated brain to you hands- that gush from you is one of the most inane pieces of anal waffle I've read today !
All very well Mark but Richard D Hall asked us not to report from the time of his court case. He then hosted people attacking us. Aside from that if you believe that Manchester is the most important event in the world then stand up and report it. We will be the first to congratulate you. We have other priorities at the moment. You like many people assume that we have never helped or sought to help Richard D Hall. That is not true we offered him support a long time ago. You can lead a horse to water..
That is most incredible information I hear in these mostly iffy comments!
Thank you so very much for sharing that vey surprising view=
''...Richard D Hall asked us not to report from the time of his court case.''
Did he supply reason for request? (Here I am strictly speculating)
Like: 'Hi Brian & team, I am on lemming run & wish myself to appear even more despicable than Alistair Crowley, please do not help me as it may interfere with scripted outcome too much. I am Britain's sickest man proud of the fact (then a series of expletives to cement his point) ! ' ?
Whatever he say, fact is by requesting you to evade commentary has brought you much vilification among interested people! So many little moaners say you are pussybums for not covering Halls lemming run !
Maybe it would have been better for everyone if you mention this earlier ?
Rather they did not want to have anything to do w/ RDH or johnSON etc. Cuz they are both BS peddlers, or did they distance themselves from all the crap?? One needs not more then to look at this link at IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm9302917/mediaviewer/rm1180687361/?ref_=nm_ph_1
The Uk Column video is excellent.