Muad’Dib’s / John Anthony Hill’s (JAH) trial has now concluded.

[medusa]

OK sorry.

 

Just one more thing that certainly wouldn't have been discussed here yet, because it only came up at the inquest.

 

What do people think the "good operational reasons" were, that made MI5 decide not to investigate it's March 2005 intelligence that Mohammed Sidique Khan had undergone military training in Afghanistan ?

 

And this is relevant to the topic of this thread how?

[Norbert]

All of these media reports of what happened at Canary Wharf on July 7 have been accessed and analysed by Rory Ridley-Duff, in his paper, Theorising Truth What Happened at Canary Wharf on 7th July 2005?, Dr Rory Ridley-Duff, Sheffield Hallam University.

 

So what if some Business Studies lecturer at Sheffield Poly has written something in the style of an academic paper about 7/7. I bet his employers don't support his conclusions or methodology.

 

Searching the net finds posts written by Ridley-Duff supporting John Hill, or as he calls him MaudDib. It suggests to me that Ridley-Duff is an acolyte of Hill, and quite possibly one of the 'truthers' on SF.

[dosxuk]

Watch the offending DVD (7/7 Ripple Effect) read the J7 website,read the official story.

 

Forgot to mention, is this the same J7 who describe said the offending DVD is evidence free and fanciful?

[RootsBooster]

Don't forget and spread the word- '7/7 was an inside job'.

It is plain to see with recent events the war machine will do anything and lie through their teeth to get what THEY* want.

 

*The Hierarchy Enslaving You.

 

Peace.

 

If you can show us some proof of this it'd be worth discussing.

 

If not it's just another useless conspiracy thread.

[evildrneil]

I wonder if he was found not guilty by reason of insanity!?

[vResistance]

Burying your head in the sand again V.

 

So you agree with Hill's actions in writing to families of the deceased which were reported at the trial?

 

Says a lot about what a wonderful character he is doesn't it.

 

 

He wants the truth to come out,the families have been lied to.

Would I do it ? ...no, but he did it with good intention.

 

Really. I didn't know about the "closure".

 

Are we really not allowed to discuss 7/7 on here any more ?

 

Not really.

 

Forgot to mention, is this the same J7 who describe said the offending DVD is evidence free and fanciful?

 

Yes and the same that do a good job of analysing the evidence but do nothing with it (as John Hill has.)and probably government controlled

 

If you can show us some proof of this it'd be worth discussing.

 

If not it's just another useless conspiracy thread.

 

Are you trying to get this discussion closed ?

 

I wonder if he was found not guilty by reason of insanity!?

 

No he wasn't,he was found not guilty because he had not commited an offence.

 

If his film had contained lies then he would have been found guilty,however it only contains facts (as reported by the Main media etc) and his opinion of what those facts could mean, even the prosecution admitted it "changes the minds of the people who see it"

[Longcol]

He wants the truth to come out,the families have been lied to.

Would I do it ? ...no, but he did it with good intention.

 

 

Writing to a berevead family saying that he believed their daughter had been murdered by security services on Hill's part does not show "good intention" . To most people that shows he's either sick or mentally ill.

[vResistance]

" A MAN has been acquitted of sending a DVD to families bereaved by the July 7 attacks claiming the four suicide bombers from Yorkshire were “innocent patsies”."

 

A quote from yesterday's Yorkshire post.

 

Again they open with an attack and lie saying he was acquitted of sending it to families .He was not accused or on trial for that act.

 

Do you write for the Yorkshire post longcol ?.

[Longcol]

" A MAN has been acquitted of sending a DVD to families bereaved by the July 7 attacks claiming the four suicide bombers from Yorkshire were “innocent patsies”."

 

A quote from yesterday's Yorkshire post.

 

Again they open with an attack and lie saying he was acquitted of sending it to families .He was not accused or on trial for that act.

 

Do you write for the Yorkshire post longcol ?.

 

Nope and the Yorkshire post have got their facts wrong in that bit you selectively quote.

 

The story clearly says;

 

"But the 63-year-old was found not guilty of two counts of attempting to pervert the course of justice by posting six copies of the DVD to the foreman of the jury and one to the judge presiding over a 2008 trial at Kingston Crown Court linked to the suicide bombings."

 

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/at-a-glance/main-section/man_cleared_over_7_7_bombers_are_innocent_dvd_1_3379216

 

Hardly an open attack and a lie.

[vResistance]

But the 63-year-old was found not guilty of two counts of attempting to pervert the course of justice by posting six copies of the DVD to the foreman of the jury and one to the judge presiding over a 2008 trial at Kingston Crown Court linked to the suicide bombings.

 

Jurors at Hill’s trial at Southwark Crown Court in London were told this week that the packages were intercepted by court staff before they reached the intended targets.

 

They were traced by DNA and fingerprinting to Hill, who was living in Carrick Street, Kells, County Meath, in Ireland.

 

Annabel Darlow, prosecuting, said the “central thrust” of the film was that the four who had been identified as the 7/7 bombers were innocent men who had been set up by the authorities and murdered.

 

She said: “It was argued in the film that the explosions on the Tube and on the bus in Tavistock Square were not caused by bombs from the rucksacks but, in fact, the Tubes and the bus had been pre-rigged by the powers-that-be with explosives.”

 

Jurors rejected her case against Hill and cleared him on Thursday, a court official said."

 

 

 

More from the Yorkshire post article.

Seems to contradict the first paragraph doesn't it ?