Richard D Hall December 2020 Presentation "Scamdemic"

[happyuk]

Long awaited new presentation from the Geordie engineer and researcher.

As with much of his important work, this needs to be listened to by millions of people.

He hosts his complete set of videos from the richplanet.net home page (which he prefers his viewers to use) due to unrelenting YouTube censorship.

https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=286&part=1&gen=99


After taking a six month break from producing videos, Richard returns with a five part series exploring the global corona virus pandemic scam. Richplanet has received nearly 1,000 emails from concerned citizens about many different aspects of this frustrating and highly concerning situation, which humanity has been plunged into. With help from campaigner and Richplanet stalwart Andrew Johnson, Richard explores areas including germ theory, evidence of pre-planning, evidence of fraudulent statistics, legal challenges, vaccination, propaganda, censorship, Bill Gates, Geopolitics and the new monetary and technocratic systems which are being planned as a result of a blatantly engineered "crisis". Humanity is being dehumanised in a number of ways, the population of the world must protest harder if freedom is to be re-gained.

[Tintin]

Thanks for posting this up.

This is only my own view here, but, I don't think the world is holding its breath for Richard's "take" on all this. I'll give it a go, but, and I do mean this kindly, he's not the brightest spark out there. His Madeleine McCann efforts were the best I've seen him do actually and have a lot to merit them.

My two cents....

[happyuk]

Thanks for posting this up.

This is only my own view here, but, I don't think the world is holding its breath for Richard's "take" on all this. I'll give it a go, but, and I do mean this kindly, he's not the brightest spark out there. His Madeleine McCann efforts were the best I've seen him do actually and have a lot to merit them.

My two cents....

Hi Tintin, like me Hall is an engineer. In a previous life as an engineering consultant and contractor he worked on motorway communication networks, nuclear loading systems for the Trident programme and power station data acquisition and control systems. These are all tough, don't-come-back-until-it's-fixed kind of roles. Not to mention running his own IT consultancy.

This puts him light years ahead of most media pundits, YouTube / social media commentators, politicians, medical bureaucrats, newsreaders, actors, rock stars, reality TV contestants, civil servants, mainstream media journalists - and most of the population in general really.

What leads you to believe Hall is not the "brightest spark" out there?

[Brigantia]

Hi Tintin, like me Hall is an engineer. In a previous life as an engineering consultant and contractor he worked on motorway communication networks, nuclear loading systems for the Trident programme and power station data acquisition and control systems. These are all tough, don't-come-back-until-it's-fixed kind of roles. Not to mention running his own IT consultancy.

This puts him light years ahead of most media pundits, YouTube / social media commentators, politicians, medical bureaucrats, newsreaders, actors, rock stars, reality TV contestants, civil servants, mainstream media journalists - and most of the population in general really.

What leads you to believe Hall is not the "brightest spark" out there?

I'm with you there; I've met Richard twice and spoken to him at length; he has an amazing memory and ability to make connections. If you give him an opinion, he will tease out and stretch your reasoning. He does that in a kind way too, never "you're wrong" or "you're an idiot".

I would also recommend his Jo Cox film. I thought that the conclusion that he came to was brilliant, as was his train of thought that led to it.

[Tintin]

What leads you to believe Hall is not the "brightest spark" out there?

That's interesting feedback from you there (and Hikerchick as well.)

Hey, I could be wrong here :) To answer your question, based on seeing him interviewing people is what prompted the comment. I have at times found him excruciating to listen to and it's that style that doesn't come across convincingly, at least to me, when he conducts interviews; he seems to bumble around. Perhaps that interviewing skill isn't his forté.

Like I said, I'll give his videos a go here, but I'm not expecting anything 'new' that hasn't already been covered eg by someone like James Corbett who, in my view, is streets ahead of other commentators.

I'll provide further feedback, if it's appropriate to do so and helpful in any way, when I've made time to view his contribution.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

I've watched and considered a great deal of his work. His best presentations - and required viewing in my opinion for particularly UK viewers - are the documentaries listed here:

https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre_menu.php?gen=17

His Madeleine films are stunning, and more comprehensive than any other production I've seen. The Jo Cox, Jill Dando, Patsy Driver, UFOs and NATO films were also top, top quality productions. There are also a large body of 9/11 and 7/7 material in various 30minute episodes (https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre_menu.php?gen=3). It was with these that he brought Judy Wood to everyone's attention. He does rely rather a lot on the input of Andrew Johnson (also a member here), who is also a bright spark, but in my opinion simply not correct with all his conclusions. But the shows in which Neil Sanders appears should not be missed.

The main caveat I have are with some of the terrorism cases Hall examines (and he examines most of them), where he concludes that virtually all of them are false flag/psyops, that seemingly all terrorism is state sponsored theatre and the victims are just actors (i.e. probably no real casualties involved). I believe his show on the Lee Rigby murder, which he claimed was completely fake, was what got him pulled from TV by Ofcom. I can't seem to find those shows on his site anymore so maybe he removed them?

At any rate, his tinfoil hat is considerably larger than most. He's on the money with a great deal of his research, but in some areas he wanders down the wrong rabbit hole.

My 2 cents.

[Tyy1907]

His work on cattle mutilations and the UFO phenomenon I thought was pretty good. We can all be led astray at times.

[DaveToo]

I've watched and considered a great deal of his work. His best presentations - and required viewing in my opinion for particularly UK viewers - are the documentaries listed here:
...

At any rate, his tinfoil hat is considerably larger than most. He's on the money with a great deal of his research, but in some areas he wanders down the wrong rabbit hole.

My 2 cents.

I like Richard as a person. He comes across as being sincere and certainly has strong convictions.

I won't be rushing however to view the work mentioned above anytime soon.

It was his worshipping and proselytizing of Judy Wood's 9/11 D.E.W. work
in conjunction with his no-plane theory for the twin towers that turned
me off from him.

Nice guy though.

[Lazarus]

Hi Happy
Richard D Hall, oh yes. I,m a brand newbie and I honour you with being the recipient of my first reply on Avalon.
Only yesterday I was eagerly scanning Y/T for Richards take on the current shambolic, did,nt know he had taken leave
and was disappointed. Thank you for this info.

[Harmony]

:flower:
Hi Happy
Richard D Hall, oh yes. I,m a brand newbie and I honour you with being the recipient of my first reply on Avalon.
Only yesterday I was eagerly scanning Y/T for Richards take on the current shambolic, did,nt know he had taken leave
and was disappointed. Thank you for this info.

Welcome to Project Avalon Lazarus. Thank you for your post and we look forward to reading more from you. :flower:

[Justplain]

I've watched and considered a great deal of his work. His best presentations - and required viewing in my opinion for particularly UK viewers - are the documentaries listed here:
...

At any rate, his tinfoil hat is considerably larger than most. He's on the money with a great deal of his research, but in some areas he wanders down the wrong rabbit hole.

My 2 cents.

I like Richard as a person. He comes across as being sincere and certainly has strong convictions.

I won't be rushing however to view the work mentioned above anytime soon.

It was his worshipping and proselytizing of Judy Woods' 9/11 D.E.W. work
in conjunction with his no-plane theory for the twin towers that turned
me off from him.

Nice guy though.

I think Judy Woods' analysis of 9/11 was superb, and I personally believe they used holograms to disguise the missiles used in 9/11. Have you seen the video of a whale hologram spashing in a gymnasium? That's an example of it in action:

LM0T6hLH15k

[yelik]

I for one thought this was an excellent video. It takes someone with high intelligence to explain stuff in simple terms.

University Professors typically use highfalutin terminology to appear intelligent whilst confusing others to protect their status and Rockefeller grants.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

I like Richard as a person. He comes across as being sincere and certainly has strong convictions.

I won't be rushing however to view the work mentioned above anytime soon.

It was his worshipping and proselytizing of Judy Woods' 9/11 D.E.W. work
in conjunction with his no-plane theory for the twin towers that turned
me off from him.

Nice guy though.

In a subsequent show he thoroughly (and thankfully) retracted his no-plane theory after conducting a detailed and very fascinating second-by-second analysis of the WTC attack, by overlaying a 3d model of Manhattan with the radar tracks he obtained for the two planes, and cross-referencing those tracks with video footage of the second impact from I believe upwards of 40 different angles.

He not only went out of his way to disprove his earlier (pet) conviction but ended up illustrating the reality of two real, physical planes crashing into the twin towers that day, and that there was no video fakery involved. Watch that episode, it's a slam dunk.

It's also a sign that he's a researcher with strong integrity, that all he is interested in is the truth (even if he does get it wrong sometimes).

¤=[Post Update]=¤



I think Judy Woods' analysis of 9/11 was superb, and I personally believe they used holograms to disguise the missiles used in 9/11. Have you seen the video of a whale hologram spashing in a gymnasium? That's an example of it in action:

LM0T6hLH15k

Not a hologram, because that technology does not exist. This is simply augmented reality. In other words a composite.

[Mike Gorman]

Thanks for posting this up.

This is only my own view here, but, I don't think the world is holding its breath for Richard's "take" on all this. I'll give it a go, but, and I do mean this kindly, he's not the brightest spark out there. His Madeleine McCann efforts were the best I've seen him do actually and have a lot to merit them.

My two cents....

Could be that this man has a 'working class' Geordie accent, this can sometimes obscure perceptions-he has a very blunt style of speaking, typical engineer really!
i have taken a look, this is a good video, a comprehensive survey of the issues, and sound analysis IMO

[DaveToo]

I like Richard as a person. He comes across as being sincere and certainly has strong convictions.

I won't be rushing however to view the work mentioned above anytime soon.

It was his worshipping and proselytizing of Judy Woods' 9/11 D.E.W. work
in conjunction with his no-plane theory for the twin towers that turned
me off from him.

Nice guy though.

In a subsequent show he thoroughly (and thankfully) retracted his no-plane theory after conducting a detailed and very fascinating second-by-second analysis of the WTC attack, by overlaying a 3d model of Manhattan with the radar tracks he obtained for the two planes, and cross-referencing those tracks with video footage of the second impact from I believe upwards of 40 different angles.

He not only went out of his way to disprove his earlier (pet) conviction but ended up illustrating the reality of two real, physical planes crashing into the twin towers that day, and that there was no video fakery involved. Watch that episode, it's a slam dunk.

It's also a sign that he's a researcher with strong integrity, that all he is interested in is the truth (even if he does get it wrong sometimes).[COLOR="red"]



Hall has been all over the map with his 9/11 research.

First he did a painstaking 3-D analysis of the flights and determined they were flying orbs!

Then he changed his mind and said they used holograms!!

Then he changed his mind and said they were cloaked missiles!!!

If you could point me in the direction of any video he made where he states two real planes crashed into the towers
I'd appreciate it. :)


As per his zealous role as a Judy Wood disciple; some credit must be given to Dr. Wood. She did get it partly right. D.E.W.'s were used on 9/11, just not the ones Dr. Wood refers to.
No 'Star Wars' beams coming from space or above ground.
But underneath the towers in the sub-basements D.E.W.'s were used.
Nuclear D.E.W.'s.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

First he did a painstaking 3-D analysis of the flights and determined they were flying orbs!

Then he changed his mind and said they used holograms!!

Then he changed his mind and said they were cloaked missiles!!!

If you could point me in the direction of any video he made where he states two real planes crashed into the towers
I'd appreciate it. :)

Yes he changed his mind as he dug deeper and conducted more analyses. That's the scientific method, and the sign of a researcher without an agenda. Each and every one of us, me included, have changed our minds, and many times, while developing theories for how exactly the events of 9/11 played out.

The first rule of 'alt' research in my book is, do not rule out the improbable, nor even the absurd. The second being, remain fluid. Assume the conclusion you have reached will not be the ultimate one.

That goes for every theory on every topic.

The 9/11 episode in question is probably this one (https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=233&part=3&gen=3), where he does state quite clearly (at 26.40) that his conclusion "is merely a theory, and he's prepared to change his views in light of new evidence."

And you can't get fairer than that.

And just because I disagree with the theory of 'missiles' or whatever, it doesn't depreciate the quality of his work in other areas, notably his above mentioned series of documentaries.

Hall is right in one aspect, the WTC towers were not hit by 767s. Not standard Boeing 767s. That's disproven in the first layer of analysis by virtue of structural integrity and the laws of air resistance: a 767 will simply disintegrate flying 500 mph+ at sea-level; its engines also only have 1/6 of the power necessary to even reach that speed at sea-level.

Not missiles and certainly not holograms. I conclude (somewhere in one of the 9/11 threads) that what hit those buildings were planes, but reinforced military grade 767 analogues/lookalikes. But that's another debate.

[DaveToo]

First he did a painstaking 3-D analysis of the flights and determined they were flying orbs!

Then he changed his mind and said they used holograms!!

Then he changed his mind and said they were cloaked missiles!!!

If you could point me in the direction of any video he made where he states two real planes crashed into the towers
I'd appreciate it. :)

Yes he changed his mind as he dug deeper and conducted more analyses. That's the scientific method, and the sign of a researcher without an agenda. Each and every one of us, me included, have changed our minds, and many times, while developing theories for how exactly the events of 9/11 played out.

True an honest researcher will confess to their mistakes and yes I have made my share of them too. But the difference is that I have not gone public with them, whereas Richard has, and that has left him open to criticism about his wavering on this issue.
That is an important distinction. But kudos to him for updating his views and always being willing to change his view if new evidence is presented to him.

Having said that, I find an amazing degree of sloppiness to his 9/11 research even 16-17 years after the events of that day!



The 9/11 episode in question is probably this one (https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=233&part=3&gen=3), where he does state quite clearly (at 26.40) that his conclusion "is merely a theory, and he's prepared to change his views in light of new evidence."

And you can't get fairer than that.

Star Mariner I was asking specifically:
“If you could point me in the direction of any video he made where he states two real planes crashed into the towers. I'd appreciate it.”

And to that you came up with the above clip at 26.40.

Well I watched that and much more than I probably should have and he never states
that real planes crashed into the towers. :(



And just because I disagree with the theory of 'missiles' or whatever, it doesn't depreciate the quality of his work in other areas, notably his above mentioned series of documentaries.

Yes I agree with that. But my comment was zeroing in on planes, and you had led me to understand that Hall had finally come around and was now stating that planes did hit the towers. He did not state that in the clip you referenced above.



Hall is right in one aspect, the WTC towers were not hit by 767s. Not standard Boeing 767s. That's disproven in the first layer of analysis by virtue of structural integrity and the laws of air resistance: a 767 will simply disintegrate flying 500 mph+ at sea-level; its engines also only have 1/6 of the power necessary to even reach that speed at sea-level.

Correct, almost every serious 9/11 researcher has come to this conclusion.



Not missiles and certainly not holograms. I conclude (somewhere in one of the 9/11 threads) that what hit those buildings were planes, but reinforced military grade 767 analogues/lookalikes. But that's another debate.

And after years of 9/11 research (on all areas of the events) I agree with your conclusion!


I mentioned I watched way more of the Hall videos at his site now than I really should have. But here are some key points that you and others should be aware of:

From the clip you referred to (around 26.40)

“Right, but I've looked at all of the evidence, I've looked at all of these videos in detail and my current theory is that there probably was something solid that was seen in the sky. I don't think it was a plane. So the most likely explanation in my opinion is, there was some solidness to it, but I suspect it was a missile, alright.
And what we were actually seeing is some kind of fakery.”

” People have called it a hologram, I don't use that word, I don't know what they use. But I do not believe that there was a plane in the sky, I believe that we were being tricked by whatever was seen.”

“Now if we just go down the premise of my theory and as I said I'm prepared to debate this with anyone and I'm prepared to change my view on it, um, and I'm not the first person to suggest that it was a missile cloaked in an image, right.”

The above video was made on Oct 21, 2016

In his Sep 9, 2017 video "Layers of Deception" he did soften his view noticeably, but still found a way to throw in his missile theory towards the end.

Notable quotes from this video and also some summaries:

Andrew Johnson:
He says the litmus test for whether the person is telling the truth about the planes can come from whether the person believes in Dr. Judy Wood and her DEW theory !!!
If they don't believe in the DEW theory then their position on the planes cannot be trusted! LOL!!! I kid you not!


Richard D. Hall: 9:12

"I'll go as far as to say that the planes were at least to some degree faked,” (a softening of his position)

“The Herz. footage seems to go inside and then there's an explosion, so do you think that was, ummm, part of what went inside the building that created the explosion, because it seems to project forwards, part of a missile, which is now exploding?”

Mark Conlon:
“Yeah I'm more of a 'missile may have been cloaked' hypothesis. (as suggested in Pentagate (Meyssan)).

Andrew Johnson:
"Even though the one found in Murray St. in New York, it was under some scaffolding, and there was no crater, you know there was no like bounce, where it bounced along the ground or crashed into the ground, it was just like there, under some scaffolding.”

This is simply pure sloppy research by Johnson! There is plenty of physical evidence
of cratering and bouncing/rolling of the engine until it finally rested under the scaffolding.

Richard D. Hall:
"So somebody could have come around with a van and just dumped it..."

This comment by Richard shows that he too has done little to no research about the Murray St. engine!

"I remember there was a photograph in Milon Lane (?) you know the under-carriage where the wheels come down, there was a wheels stuck between two apartments blocks in N.Y. years and years after, like someone wouldn't have removed it or, whatever?”

Once again this comment shows that Richard hasn’t done his homework with respect to those plane parts!

And then after all this he still posits that it might have been holograms near the end of the video!!!

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Oh yeh I'm totally with you on that Dave. Missiles are a complete dead end. The idea is almost as illogical as holograms. Occam's Razor states (to me anyway), that if - step one - you want to destroy the WTC in a grand spectacle involving two planes crashing into the World Trade Centre, then you actually crash two planes into the World Trade Centre!!

Step two in this scenario - hypothesizing - is that you ensure the desired affect of those collisions: eg enormous explosions, widespread fires, and gigantic holes in the towers. 'Normal planes' won't do that, so you use 'special planes'. They had to look like normal planes because these had to take the blame for triggering the structural failure of the building(s). But they act as merely a key to open the door to step three: initiating the actual but covert structural failure of the buildings (with thermite charges, DEWs, or whatever it was).

That's probably what went down. But anyway, I totally agree Hall is off base here. Way off. I also agree, as I said in post #6, about Andrew Johnson. And whereas I find Judy Wood's work very interesting, there's no slam dunk smoking gun evidence for her 'dustification' model. It is just a theory, although to some it has become an ideology.



Star Mariner I was asking specifically:
“If you could point me in the direction of any video he made where he states two real planes crashed into the towers. I'd appreciate it.”

Nope can't find one lol, and like you I'm reluctant to go searching for any. But again, just because he's totally wrong in my opinion with his missile theory, it doesn't lessen the value of his other work. If for example you've watched his Maddy McCann films you'll note how impressive and rigorous his determination and research methodology is. He makes connections (in that case) that I've never seen before.

It does beg the question why he's championing such a daft idea as cloaked missiles. It smacks of disinfo if I'm honest, but he just does not strike me as a disinfo artist. Not when you look at his other work. My assumption is that, as I said in post #6, is tinfoil hat has grown too big, as he tends to overlook the mundane and rational in favour of an X-Files type explanation to everything. I'd say he was only guilty of that.

[happyuk]

Another presentation from Rich D Hall, show #299


In part one of today's show, more on the Scamdemic, including a scientific paper which presents the truly shocking and earth shattering claim that CRISPR gene drive DNA has been found within the Pfizer/Biontech Covid-19 vaccine. If this is true, the ramifications are potentially unthinkable. It means that someone has wielded the power to genetically alter not just some, but ALL human beings, because once a CRISPR gene drive is released into a population, the genetic modification that it carries will eventually permeate into the entire population. The claims in this scientific paper have not been confirmed and Richplanet is seeking to have independent tests carried out on the Comirnaty vaccine to either prove or rule out the claim. In part 2 we take another look at self sufficiency and reducing dependence on the "system".

https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=299&part=1&gen=99

[norman]

Another presentation from Rich D Hall, show #299


In part one of today's show, more on the Scamdemic, including a scientific paper which presents the truly shocking and earth shattering claim that CRISPR gene drive DNA has been found within the Pfizer/Biontech Covid-19 vaccine. If this is true, the ramifications are potentially unthinkable. It means that someone has wielded the power to genetically alter not just some, but ALL human beings, because once a CRISPR gene drive is released into a population, the genetic modification that it carries will eventually permeate into the entire population. The claims in this scientific paper have not been confirmed and Richplanet is seeking to have independent tests carried out on the Comirnaty vaccine to either prove or rule out the claim. In part 2 we take another look at self sufficiency and reducing dependence on the "system".

https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=299&part=1&gen=99

My big burning question is, what will the genetic change they are making to the whole (remaining) human race manifest as, if they get it done ?

I assume they have a very specific change in mind, and I assume, despite all the noise about "experimental vaccines", that they have been perfecting this secretly in underground facilities for decades using thousands, or hundreds of thousands, of human laboratory test victims.

In my own mind, it's not enough to know they are changing the human DNA, I need to know what into ?

I imagine there are early production specimens of such new humans somewhere. Can I see or meet one ?

What about the possibility that those stories we've heard about hybrid 'aliens' needing training to be humans by being placed in foster home situations were really the early output from this secret underground project ?

Or, is the genetic tweak an alien genetic tweak ? There is so much to know, that we are not even asking yet.

I had a conversation with my brother on the phone recently where he told me a lot of people are now aware that the tv news is lying to them. My replay, bluntly, was big-deal, so now they know it's all lies, how long will it take them to find out and get their heads around what it is they are NOT being told. Realising you don't have the truth is not the same thing as joining truth dots. That's another step up again.

I feel the same thing about this vax scam. Calling every official in the world a corrupt criminal liar ( at best ) gets us no nearer knowing what's really going on.

[Michel Leclerc]

You are quite right Norman. But that getting to the truth is what Richard D. Hall is trying to do, is he not?

I suggest sending the url of his show 299 part 1 to all our somewhat science-minded friends with the request to try and forward it to molecular biologists they may know.

[happyuk]

In the latest show (#301) Rich Hall exposes pretend journalist Marianna Spring from the BBC for harassing him.

https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=301&part=1&gen=99

[jaybee]

This is an interesting presentation by Richard D Hall... sharing what he has done to his house that he bought (in South Wales)... to free himself from the system as much as possible - I wouldn't have the skills to do what he's done and couldn't as I live in a rented Council property... but it's of interest anyway ... for example collecting water of the roof and getting pipes to distribute it around the house - using solar panels and having a zero electric bill - using a wood burner and other things -

He's done a really good job and is very focussed and tenacious to achieve what he has... you have to hand it to him....

His YouTube channel has been taken down and I have tried to watch some of his stuff on the richplanet TV site but it was stopping and starting all the time and could be tampered with - although the one about the BBC Reporter trying to trap him into giving an interview seemed to be ok... he's got shows on odysee and that's where I saw this one -

yay I managed to embed it ... :)

@halloftruth:c/free-from-the-system-richplanet-tv-richard-d-hall:d

video description...


What chance does an individual have of changing the almost invisible regime which is currently destroying our lives and freedoms? We try always to enlighten people and wake them up to the truth, so that the knowledge might push back the decisions of authority who are trying to put shackles on humanity.

What chance do we have?
Instead of attacking the system with words, how about abstaining from the system which seeks to control you? Reduce your dependence on the system, making you less of a slave to their rules. By turning our backs on the government and corporate systems, and by developing new disconnected lives, could this provide a far more fruitful form of protest than using our voices, keyboards and placards?

Why would you want to be part of a system ran by criminals?

He's got a point but the level of dependence is so great in modern society it takes a lot to do what he's done - but it's a great example of what can be done with determination and practical skills...

I enjoyed watching it anyway and anyone with their own house with a paid up mortgage could learn a lot from it if they wanted to do something similar -

[Brigantia]

This is an interesting presentation by Richard D Hall... sharing what he has done to his house that he bought (in South Wales)... to free himself from the system as much as possible - I wouldn't have the skills to do what he's done and couldn't as I live in a rented Council property... but it's of interest anyway ... for example collecting water of the roof and getting pipes to distribute it around the house - using solar panels and having a zero electric bill - using a wood burner and other things -

He's done a really good job and is very focussed and tenacious to achieve what he has... you have to hand it to him....

I got round to watching it a couple of days ago and had to keep pausing it to scribble down notes. He included a lot of viewer tips that were very interesting and helpful.

He did train as an engineer so he does have the edge over someone like me who hasn't a clue about how machines work, he installed most of the solar equipment and various plumbing and electrical bits himself.

It's far better to be in Wales, Scotland or Ireland as well as England's planning regulations are draconian. I loved the clip about the couple in Ireland who expanded caravan living to a smallholding at a very low cost, mainly with equipment bought cheaply or acquired for free.

Here's a link to his 2021 videos on the work he was doing on his house to go off-grid.
https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=289&part=1&gen=99

Edit - I've just realised, was it the 2021 vid on Odysee that you were referring to Jaybee? The Odysee vid just keeps scrolling and doesn't play... I thought you were referring to his recent update, part 2 of this link. All of them are worth a watch!
https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=299&part=2&gen=99

[jaybee]

Here's a link to his 2021 videos on the work he was doing on his house to go off-grid.
https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=289&part=1&gen=99

Edit - I've just realised, was it the 2021 vid on Odysee that you were referring to Jaybee? The Odysee vid just keeps scrolling and doesn't play... I thought you were referring to his recent update, part 2 of this link. All of them are worth a watch!
https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=299&part=2&gen=99


Yes, I think it's the 16/7/21 video that was in 3 parts on the richplanet TV site - I couldn't get it to play on that site but I could watch it on odysee -

After his Youtube channel was removed, having trouble getting videos to play on his own site and then seeing that the BBC are after him.... I am concerned that he could be being targeted and 'they' might try and do an Alex Jones on him and get people to say his investigative work has caused them distress etc etc... no doubt he has thought of this himself ....

[norman]

November 1, 2022
Manchester Mayor calls for jail time for those that spread “offensive lies and conspiracies”
By Christina Maas

https://reclaimthenet.org/mayor-manchester-andy-burnham-jail-conspiracies/


The Mayor of the English city of Manchester, Andy Burnham, has called for a new law to prosecute those who spread “offensive lies and conspiracies.”

Mayor Burnam’s comments followed a man being sued for claiming that the Manchester Arena attack in 2017 was a hoax.


That Man is Richard D. Hall.

He's now getting the "Alex Jones" treatment.

[Brigantia]

November 1, 2022
Manchester Mayor calls for jail time for those that spread “offensive lies and conspiracies”
By Christina Maas

https://reclaimthenet.org/mayor-manchester-andy-burnham-jail-conspiracies/

The Mayor of the English city of Manchester, Andy Burnham, has called for a new law to prosecute those who spread “offensive lies and conspiracies.”

Mayor Burnam’s comments followed a man being sued for claiming that the Manchester Arena attack in 2017 was a hoax.


That Man is Richard D. Hall.

He's now getting the "Alex Jones" treatment.

Apart from a report in his virtual 2020 tour, the last vid that RDH did on Manchester was in 2019; three years ago.

So - why all the outrage now?

[Spiral]

November 1, 2022
Manchester Mayor calls for jail time for those that spread “offensive lies and conspiracies”
By Christina Maas

https://reclaimthenet.org/mayor-manchester-andy-burnham-jail-conspiracies/

The Mayor of the English city of Manchester, Andy Burnham, has called for a new law to prosecute those who spread “offensive lies and conspiracies.”

Mayor Burnam’s comments followed a man being sued for claiming that the Manchester Arena attack in 2017 was a hoax.


That Man is Richard D. Hall.

He's now getting the "Alex Jones" treatment.

Apart from a report in his virtual 2020 tour, the last vid that RDH did on Manchester was in 2019; three years ago.

So - why all the outrage now?

Because it's the easiest thing to bring him down over, he's flown very close to the line for some time.

This follows the lead of Alex Jones's court case & David Icke being banned & labelled a "terrorist" by the EU.

The net is closing. I have followed RDH for a long time, I thought this would have happened ages ago with the things he's covered, such as 7/7 and the McCann case tbh.

He has had his market stall taken away too by his local council, since when does the BBC tell councils what to do ?

[Brigantia]

Because it's the easiest thing to bring him down over, he's flown very close to the line for some time.

This follows the lead of Alex Jones's court case & David Icke being banned & labelled a "terrorist" by the EU.

The net is closing. I have followed RDH for a long time, I thought this would have happened ages ago with the things he's covered, such as 7/7 and the McCann case tbh.

He has had his market stall taken away too by his local council, since when does the BBC tell councils what to do ?

Agreed - it was a rhetorical question. I think that focusing on Manchester was the easiest way to get the torch and pitchfork-bearing masses against him as so many were emotionally hooked in by the story. Maybe the aim is to get his website taken down, which will be tragic as he has some great shows on there.

Cluesforum has 5 pages of posts analysing Manchester, and other pages of analysis of many other psyops. It has gone quiet in the last few years but I wonder if they will be targeted too.

The timing does seem suspicious so shortly after the death of Ross Broadstock (whose funeral is tomorrow); RDH did collaborate with Ross on a few shows, a few on Ross's channel and one on RDH's.

[jaybee]

.

Richard Hall himself has said (somewhere) that clamping down on him and others is part of the preparations for the 'Online Harms' Bill that the government are trying to get into law but haven't managed to yet because details are still being ironed out...

It's to do with regulating online speech etc that's legal but (allegedly) causes harm....

What could possibly go wrong...? :rolleyes: As we are already on the slippy slope to authoritarianism and all that comes with that..

this video (8:10) discusses it and the nitty gritty can be found at around the 4:00 time stamp...

Free speech online: Sam Dumitriu on proposed legislation in the Online Harms Bill

4e2e_jIvW0g

and this is a summary of the Online Harms White Paper..

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/973940/EASY_READ_Online_Harms_White_Paper_V2.pdf

I've only just looked into this and it's obviously going to open to abuse by people in positions of power, those pushing an agenda and those wanting to completely control the Official Narrative...