Feb 252013
 

TV licence evader refused to pay because the ‘BBC covered up facts about 9/11 and claimed tower fell 20 minutes before it did’

49-year-old man refused to pay his TV licence because he believed the BBC covered up facts about the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Tony Rooke, who represented himself today at Horsham Magistrates’ Court in West Sussex, said he did not want to give money to an organisation ‘funding the practice of terrorism’.

Rooke, who admitted owning a TV and watching it without a licence, was found guilty of using an unlicensed set, given a six-month conditional discharge and told to pay £200 costs.

He was visited in May 2012 by an inspector after withdrawing his licence in March, but said he was withholding the funds under the Terrorism Act.

Section 15 of the 2000 Act 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.

‘I am withholding all funds from the BBC, the Government and subsidiaries under Section 15 of the Terrorism Act,’ he told the inspector.

He added that he had already lodged a complaint with the BBC.

Rooke told the court: ‘I believe the BBC, who are directly funded by the licence fee, are furthering the purposes of terrorism and I have incontrovertible evidence to this effect. I do not use this word lightly given where I am.’

Read article in Daily Mail here

  3 Responses to “TV licence evader refused to pay because the ‘BBC covered up facts about 9/11 and claimed tower fell 20 minutes before it did’”

  1. This is wonderful news, excellent mainstream coverage! Congratulations to Tony Rooke – What a hero 🙂

    The comments are open at the Daily Mail and I have posted this comment based on a copy of my letter to the Beeb last year.

    Congratulations to Mr Rooke for his courage and integrity. He deserves the
    highest praise for this action and for providing the public with information
    about 9/11 that sadly the BBC has indeed distorted and misrepresented. The
    events of September 11 provided a pretext for a War on Terror that has led
    to military invasions and occupations, and attacks upon civil and human
    rights both in Britain and throughout the world. This issue is critically
    important to both the citizens of Great Britain and their commonwealth
    allies who have been taken into these wars on the basis of the official
    story of 9/11 that has been represented by the BBC. I hope in the very near
    future the BBC chooses to be on the side of the truth and pays attention to
    the now 1700 technical and building professionals who have signed their
    names in support of the request for a new and truly independent
    investigation of the events of 911 (which includes the mysterious collapse
    of WTC 7).
    ===========================================
    22 July 2012

    Dear MPs on the Culture, Media and Sport Committee,

    I am an avid viewer of the BBC, along with my family, friends and colleagues both within the UK and here in New Zealand, particularly in relation to world news and events.

    I am writing to you today as a petition signer with the organisation Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth) which is composed of 1,700 technical and building professionals and 14,000 other people from around the world who have signed their names in support of the request for a new and truly independent investigation, with subpoena power, into the destruction of the World Trade Centre Twin Towers and Building 7 on September 11, 2001 (“9/11”). This request is based on the extensive publically available scientific and forensic evidence that has been gathered since the world-changing events of that day. This peer-reviewed evidence demonstrates that these buildings were brought down by explosive controlled demolition.

    I would like to know why the BBC has continued to withhold this information and instead provided biased, inaccurate and misleading coverage of the 9/11 attacks as recently as September, 2011 in 2 documentaries, (‘Conspiracy Files: 9/11 ten years on’ and ‘9/11: Conspiracy Road Trip’) and a 2008 program ‘The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 – The Third Tower’ in breach of the Royal Charter, Agreement, Editorial Guidelines and Editorial Values.

    The events of September 11 provided a pretext for a War on Terror that has led to military invasions and occupations, and attacks upon civil and human rights both in Britain and throughout the world. This issue is critically important to both the citizens of Great Britain and their commonwealth allies who have been taken into these wars on the basis of the official story of 9/11 that has been represented by the BBC and the rest of the mainstream media.

    I ask that the House Media Committee who monitors the policy and administration of the BBC on behalf of the House of Commons and the electorate, respond urgently to the obfuscation of this scientific evidence by the BBC and urgently allow the sharing of this information to the British public and those around the world who view the BBC as a source of reliable, impartial and truthful information.

    I wish to support the formal complaints with the British Broadcasting Corporation and respectfully request:

    #1) That Mr. Warburton, Mr. Mallett and Mr. Drew be allowed to meet with the Committee to present their arguments and evidence and answer your questions; and

    #2) That the Committee hold its own inquiry into the bias, inaccuracy and withholding of significant scientific information in the BBC’s reporting on the 9/11 attacks.

    #3) That there be fair debate and exploration of the agreed facts with the utmost impartiality, as per the Royal Charter.

    Please will you reply so that I know you received this letter?

    Thank you.

  2. I used a similar argument in my submission on the Security Intelligence Service Amendment Bill (2010)

    Date: 15/02/2011

    SUBMISSION on the Security Intelligence Service Amendment Bill (2010)

    To the Intelligence and Security Committee,

    This submission is from:.Michael John Woods.

    I oppose this Bill for the following reasons:
    The phoney ‘War on Terror” was invented after the 9/11 attacks.
    The real terrorists are those that planted the explosives in the three World Trade Centres and those that are concealing the truth from the people.
    This Bill is designed to silence the TRUTH.