UK man wins court case against BBC for 911 cover up
Trade Center Building 7 over 20 minutes before it occurred. WTC 7 was a 47-story skyscraper that was not hit by a plane on 9/11 but collapsed at free-fall speed later that day.
So Rooke said the BBC had to have had prior knowledge to a terror attack making them complicit in the attack. He presented the BBC footage to the judge along with a slew of other evidence, and the judge agreed that Rooke had a reasonable case to protest. Rooke was found not guilty and he was not fined for failure to pay the licensing fee.
Below is the broadcast where the BBC announced the collapse of WTC 7 while it was still standing behind the reporter.
Upload to Disclose.tv
( via topinfopost.com )
dalepoon wrote September 15, 2013 1:37:11 AM CEST
my neighbor's aunt makes $61 every hour on the internet. She has been fired for 10 months but last month her payment was $14193 just working on the internet for a few hours. additional resources...
properREDeye wrote September 13, 2013 12:31:08 PM CEST
Oh thats an easy question to answer, United Kingdom PLC. Well done to this brave guy for facing a court and giving this evidence that is so readily ridiculed by the debunkers and mainstream media whores, top marks to the judge/magistrate too for swimming upstream with the decision against the BBC. I would add however, that until a thorough and complete investigation into the BBC's involvement is done and justice is served, i believe funding them is still technically illegal, so by ordering the man to buy a licence they are themselves condoning the potential further funding of terrorism. Not a smart move for a judge
Sol34now wrote September 13, 2013 5:10:37 AM CEST
not even a slap on the wrist for bbc? where the fk are we?