Triumph for 9/11 truth activist in UK court – BBC Misrepresented Facts
By Victoria N. Alexander | Digital Journal
In an act of civil disobedience, Tony Rooke refused to pay a £130 TV license fee, alleging that the BBC intentionally misrepresented facts about the 9/11 attacks. Facing a judge Monday, Rooke was ’not convicted’ and did not have to pay the fine.
Rooke, a documentary maker who made his protest against the BBC in Horsham Magistrates’ Court in West Sussex, claims the BBC reported that World Trade Center 7 collapsed
“due to an office fire, which, even the NIST report says, fell at free-fall speed for eight floors in 2.5 seconds. That is absolutely impossible without a controlled demolition being involved.”
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is the US government agency charged with investigating the collapses.
Rooke is now encouraging other activists to follow his example and refuse to support the BBC. Although technically Rooke is guilty of not paying the license fee, he pleaded “not guilty” to not having an “appropriate” license. As he explained in the above video clip,
“the license is not appropriate … because I know the BBC has covered up the true events of the day.”
Rooke further explained that supporting the BBC cover up would be tantamount to supporting the terrorists responsible for the controlled demolition. He further argued that anyone supporting terrorists is in violation of the Terrorism Act, Section 15, which states that
“it is an offence for someone to invite another to provide money, intending that it should be used, or having reasonable cause to suspect that it may be used, for terrorism purposes.”
In this Rooke employed a standard tactic of civil disobedience, claiming to be in a position where he must break one law, a local law, in order to respect a higher law. If defendants are successful in such cases, they are said to occupy “the moral high ground” and are generally given light sentences or have their cases dismissed.
Prior to the court date, Rooke had provided the court with evidence that both World Trade Center towers, as well as a third building, WTC7, were destroyed, not as a direct result of plane-impact and subsequent fires, but by controlled demolition.
Read the full article at: digitaljournal.com