Miles - Christi - English

“BBC Panorama: Disaster Trolls”

Iain Davis Substack Rant #2: The Disaster Trolls.

I have just watched the BBC Panorama programme about so-called “conspiracy theorists” having the temerity to question alleged terror attacks. After throwing my tablet across the room, and having apologised to my neighbour for the screaming tirade of expletives that woke his wife, I have calmed down sufficiently to write this rant. “BBC Panorama: Disaster Trolls” was full of stories about claimed events and experiences. There were emotional pleas, worried looks, heart rending anecdotes, and lots of head shaking in shocked disbelief.

Related: "PSEUDOPANDEMIC: New Normal Technocracy" - By Iain Davis - 2021 - Sour…

The core message was pretty clear: know your place and never question us. You must believe whatever ludicrous nonsense the government and its Ministry of Truth, the BBC, tell you about fabled terror events. Not doing so is disrespectful to the victims of said attacks. Or so the BBC claims. You must not think about any of the anomalies or gaping holes in the official terror narratives because expressing misgivings might offend the people who have protected opinions, and thereby constitutes a hate crime. Only the BBC cares about these “victims” and they protect them from the vicious hordes of people who have doubts about their anecdotes.

Exploiting the kangaroo court show trial of US showman and supplement salesman Alex Jones, the BBC set about demonising the diligent independent researcher, author, documentary film maker and fascinating public speaker Richard D. Hall. Hall is nothing like Alex Jones, but that didn’t matter to the BBC, who desperately tried to draw some ludicrous parallels. Hall’s crime, according to the BBC, was that he reported the evidence that appears to show that the story of the supposed Manchester Arena terrorist attack is about as plausible as the Magic Roundabout.

The sloppy bucket of assertions, fallacies and innuendo, carried by the BBC’s intrepid disinformation specialist, Marianna Spring, whose finely honed investigative instincts extend to instantly blocking anyone on social media who suggests evidence she may not be aware of, was terribly serious and earnest and acted like she was concerned throughout her entire Panorama performance. She said the people she had labelled as conspiracy theorists were dangerous because they don’t believe the telly like normal people. Even worse, their theories “undermine trust” in the special institutions that we aren’t allowed to question, like the government and the BBC.

Without blind, obedient “trust” in self-appointed important people and the crap organisations they grandstand upon, apparently democracy will implode. Spring said that alleged conspiracy theorists need to be tackled because not showing the proper respect for the heroes we are given is verboten in the totalitarian, elitist democratic model she peddles like a carpet saleswoman. The BBC alleged that Hall had somehow harmed the victims. It is certainly true that Hall investigated their accounts. This is, of course, what journalists and researchers are supposed to do. Although the BBC maintain that only it has the requisite “expertise,” which is why its so-called “journalists” rarely investigate anything.

People with obvious physical injuries claimed that they sustained them in the alleged bombing and a number of families publicly mourned lost loved ones. The BBC exploited their heart wrenching stories, as if they alone constitute irrefutable proof that a bombing occurred. They do not. Marianna Spring, the alleged BBC “journalist,” told the Panorama audience that investigating the dubious claims of individuals by examining medical evidence, recording their movements and scrutinising their statements, constituted an appalling assault. This was not the kind of journalism the BBC would ever engage in, she demurred.

Instead, when she interviewed the supposed victims, because it is OK for the BBC to do so, she unreservedly believed everything they told her. It didn’t even occur to her to ask any questions about the numerous inconsistencies in their accounts, or the fact that those accounts contradict the official state narrative. If, for example, the official investigation finds that the explosive used was TATP but the witnesses, who say they saw an explosion, describe a bright flash and a fireball then there is a major problem. Someone isn’t telling the truth. There is no visible flash or incendiary when TATP detonates. Both accounts cannot be true.

While Richard D. Hall combed through the evidence in exacting detail, the BBC remains pathologically allergic to it and employ “specialist reporters” who don’t need any evidence at all to trot out their completely worthless brand of anti-journalism. The BBC calls its brand of reporting “trusted news.” As the BBC’s very special disinformation correspondent, Marianna Spring has moved beyond investigative journalism and is clearly a leading exponent of this so-called “trusted news.”

Instead of investigating the evidence, reporting verifiable facts and offering informed opinion, which is what real journalists like Richard D. Hall do, “trusted news” propagandists, who can’t really be described as journalists, adopt a different approach.
Something happens and the government deploys its rapid response mechanism to issue an official story about the event. This is usually wrapped up and neatly packaged for the BBC within hours or even minutes of, in this case, the supposed attack. This is the unimpeachable truth, as far as the trusted news propagandist is concerned. They have no need to investigate the evidence because it has already been laid out for them by the government.

We should listen to all eye witness testimony, and where they are so obviously inconsistent and contradictory we have every justification to maintain reasonable doubt. Accurate witness testimony should be supported by the physical evidence. Those who claim they saw or experienced the impact of a terrorist attack do not have the physical evidence to back up their accounts. Those who question if an attack happened as described, do. In my opinion.

The question is not if someone is injured but rather how and when they sustained their injury. The question is not if someone died—though it may be—but rather when, where or how they died. Again, the evidence substantiating the alleged timings and causes of the deaths associated with the attack are highly questionable. It is not tenable to claim that an emotional account can never be questioned. The degree to which emotion is expressed is not proof of anything.

Obviously if someone is distressed, any questioning needs to mindful of the interviewees possible trauma. However, the BBC maintain that it is an obscene act to question people who are perturbed. One wonders how they think the police, or real journalists for that matter, ever question anyone. Do the investigators cease their investigation because the person they are questioning appears to be upset by their questions? The other supposed evidence, cited by the BBC, is that the authorities conducted investigations, held inquests and so-called “public” inquiries, which the public weren’t allowed to attend.

The fact that these all concluded that the official state narrative, announced within minutes of the supposed bombing, was 100% accurate, is not evidence of anything at all. Although the BBC vehemently insist that you believe it is. What matters is the evidence contained within the investigation and inquiry reports. Perhaps, even more pertinent, is the evidence that omitted. Truth can sometimes be deduced from the balance of evidence. This means “all” the evidence must be accounted for. Where evidence is denied or ignored there is no “balance” and no reason to believe that any truth has been revealed.

The so-called “public” inquiry excluded incongruous police or emergency service radio transmissions; it didn’t even acknowledge, let alone account for, contradictory witness statements; it completely ignored the lack of physical evidence to show that a bomb had exploded in the first place and it relied solely upon assertions, claims and anecdotes. Frankly, it provided no more “evidence” than a Tom Clancy novel. The BBC want their audience accept that only the proper authorities are clever enough to look at and analyse the evidence. Consequently no one else ever needs to see any. You should just take whatever you are told on “trust.”

Once the authorities have concluded their investigation and pronounced their findings, the official truth is set in perpetuity and canonised by “trusted news” organisations, like the BBC. In the BBC’s bizarre world of unquestioning, supine and utterly obedient “trusted news,” all investigation ends at this point. Thereafter, the role of BBC propagandists, like Spring, is simply to convince the public to believe the official rubbish. Government approved investigators and their pet propagandists at the BBC, are the only organisations allowed to think.

Questioning them is a heretical offence against God, as they claim omniscience. The government, its judges, investigators and the BBC, have demonstrated how brainy and honest they are on numerous occasions. For example, their original investigation and reporting of the Guildford and Birmingham pub bombings, the Steven Lawrence murder, the Finucane assassination, the Hillsborough disaster and the 7/7 terror attacks have all shown us how trustworthy these organs of the state are.

Whatever they say is “da troof.” They cannot be faulted and must never be questioned by knuckle dragging dullards like us. If we ever do question the state we might “undermine trust” in our nonexistent democracy. The state is currently creating a new kind of democratic model. It is based upon cancelling all dissenting opinions, silencing critics and persecuting anyone who dares to question the government. Laws have been passed and are being put through parliament to end whistle-blowing and investigative journalism. The BBC, who clearly don’t value journalism or free speech at all, are wholly supportive of these efforts. That’s what “Disaster Trolls” was all about.

Richard D. Hall wrote an excellent, meticulously researched book, Manchester: The Night of the Bang, highlighting the evidence that he and others unearthed. This evidence brings the supposed terrorist attack into question. The BBC went to great lengths to avoid mentioning any of it. The BBC did not feel it was necessary to burden their audience with any troubling facts or boring evidence. No rational arguments were offered and totally idiotic accusations were concocted instead, and sold to us as if they made sense.

Hall didn’t investigate the Manchester Arena bang because he has some sort of warped ideology, although the BBC insisted, without any justification whatsoever, that he did. He undertook his investigation because he wanted to know the truth. His viewers, readers and listeners, myself included, want to know too. I don’t simply believe whatever the government or the BBC tell me. I want to see and understand all of the evidence. Apparently this makes me an extremist or a potential terrorist. I find Hall’s work substantive, well evidenced and intriguing. I don’t speak for anyone else, but I guess that’s why we buy his books, watch his documentaries, attend his talks and generally support his work if we can.

It doesn’t mean we all agree with his opinions, but then again he doesn’t ask anyone to agree with them or “trust” him. He always signs off from his videos with a reminder to “believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see.” His only apparent expectation of his audience, who he clearly respects, is that they think critically about the evidence he reports and the subsequent opinions he offers. This is the polar opposite of the BBC’s approach. It openly states in its mission statement: “trust is the foundation of the BBC - we’re independent, impartial and truthful.” No it is not!

To “trust” the information given to you by an organisation is to believe that it is infallible. It is a matter of faith. All the BBC offers as reason for you to trust it, is that it is the BBC. So what? The BBC is just about the most untrustworthy media organisation in the world. Ask yourself why any so-called news organisation would ask this of its readers, viewers and listeners. If the journalism it produces is well written, backed up by evidence and honest, what necessity is there to prefix it with any demand that you “trust” it?

Only an organisation that knowingly intends to deceive its audience has any need to set a precondition of “trust.” The reported evidence should be enough, and if it isn’t there is good reason to doubt the story, no matter who writes or broadcasts it. The BBC receives billions of pounds in funding at the discretion of the government and it is paid more money by people like Bill Gates. The BBC is a partner of, for example, the UK Government’s Foreign and Commonwealth Development Office. It isn’t remotely “independent.” That claim is a lie.

During it’s evidence-free attack upon Hall, the BBC reported that he made money from his speaking tours and book sales, as if no-one but the BBC has any right to do so. While it luxuriates in billions of, what amounts to, tax payer funding for the kak it sullies the airwaves with, it seriously suggests that no one else should earn a living as a working journalist, researcher or writer. The arrogance is stomach churning. The BBC will never deviate from whatever the latest government or deep state narrative might be. Its attack on Hall was entirely motivated by its pro-state and pro establishment bias.

The purpose of “Disaster Trolls” was to convince you that people who question the government are somehow cruel or dangerous. The BBC gave its unwavering support, along with a heavy dollop of propaganda, to convince you to accept the UK government’s forthcoming public order and expanding censorship legislation. With regard to state narratives of major terror and other events, that the government want’s you to accept without reservation, The BBC does not exercise any “impartiality.” It is a duplicitous and manipulative public disinformation bureau. It’s claim of impartiality is another lamentable lie. As a state propaganda organisation, the BBC has no interest in the truth. It constantly deceives the public, the hit piece on Hall being a classic example. The BBC lied, repeatedly, to construct its propagandist message.

The BBC’s “Disaster Trolls” was proper BBC “trusted news” propaganda, complete with emotional soundtrack, obviously disingenuous pathos, nodding approval, prompting and very careful editing to ensure that the chosen political message was delivered as required. The BBC wheeled out the usual mob of claimed experts, on this occasion from the Institute of Strategic Dialogue (ISD), Kings College and their very own BBC Monitoring. They attempted to add some much needed credibility to the BBC’s incoherent dross. They couldn’t because they were talking out of their backsides. Nothing they said had any basis in fact. There is no such thing as a conspiracy theory. There are simply opinions and theories about events. Some may be entirely wrong, partially correct or spot on. The only way to tell is to examine the evidence. A practice that the BBC is hellbent upon ending.

“Conspiracy theory” is just a label slapped upon people who question the state and the stories it demands that everyone believes. The claimed psychology that supposedly demonstrated the “conspiracy theory” mindset, is pseudo-scientific junk. Despite the fact that there isn’t any reliable evidence that demonstrates how the so-called radicalisation process works, the BBC are among the many state propagandists around the world who are desperate to make you imagine both that there it exists, and that they know this made-up mechanism when they see it. Trust them!

The intention is to link alleged conspiracy theory, meaning any questioning of the government and its stories or policies, to extremism and then terrorism. This will enable the state to use its draconian anti-terrorism legislation, and the “public order” despotism it is creating, to crack down upon anyone who dares to question its authority. The BBC is busy trying to cajole you into accepting dictatorship by claiming that all of this fascistic authoritarianism is essential for your vanishing democracy. Nothing could be more anti-democratic, but the BBC is committed to lying through its teeth to get you to buy into its, and the governments, malevolent tripe.

The chosen “experts” vain attempts to add some gravitas failed because all they provided was clueless nonsense. Although to be fair to them, as the whole program was a steaming dung-pile of propagandist drivel, even Socrates would have struggled to lend it any credence. So let me lay my cards on the table. I think the Manchester Arena bomb attack was a staged event. I don’t know if anyone sustained any injury or died, but it seems unlikely to me that they did as the result of an explosion in the Arena that night. This is my opinion based upon the evidence I am aware of.

To date, as far as I know, there is no evidence available in the public domain that substantiates the claim that 22 year old Salman Obedi detonated a suicide bomb in the foyer (the City Room) of the Manchester arena at 22.31 on the 22nd of May 2017, killing 22 innocent people. No evidence was presented to substantiate this story by the police investigation, neither in the subsequent inquests nor during the public inquiry, first established on the 22nd of October 2019. Simply put, beyond the claims and anecdotes of the state , the mainstream media and the alleged survivors, there is nothing that demonstrates that the Manchester Arena “bombing” wasn’t simply another terror drill, or exercise, that was then exploited by the state to sell its political agenda.

Companies like CrisisCast regularly stage large scale simulations of terror and other crisis incidents to provide hyper-realistic training for the military, law enforcement and the emergency services, etc. They use “casualty-sim” to mimic the kind of injuries and trauma first-responders might encounter. Some examples, taken from the CrisisCast website, of these fake injuries are shown below... I am not suggesting that CrisisCast were in any way involved in the probable Manchester bomb hoax. I am stating that it is entirely possible that the whole event was staged. CrisisCast are among the specialist companies who pay people handsomely to pretend they are victims.

The BBC’s expert from the ISD, Sasha Havlicek, pointed toward’s Hall’s suspicion that crisis actors were used, as if his was a completely outlandish or unthinkable suggestion, even smirking to emphasise her deceit. Neither she nor the BBC bothered to tell the audience about the existence of multinational companies like CrisisCast. The attempt to dupe the audience was obvious. Whenever anyone scoffs at the idea that someone could be a “crisis actor” all they are demonstrating is their ignorance.

There were plenty of people involved in the Manchester Arena response who could have absolutely believed, and thus later testified, that they were responding to a real terror incident. Given the available evidence, it is entirely possible that they were, in fact, participating in staged emergency. It would only require a few well placed individual and a company like CrisisCast, or perhaps a similar in-house effects specialist of the intelligence agencies, to pull off such a deception.

This is all possible and no amount of denial or sniggering, fake intellectualism can alter that fact. We must look at the evidence ourselves if we want to find out. A still from the only video or photographic evidence, claiming to show the carnage of 22 deceased victims and an obliterated suicide bomber, following an alleged explosion that reportedly caused more than 1000 injuries, is shown below.

Some may find this picture difficult to look at. Personally, I do not think it is consistent with the story we were told. This is just my opinion. Without wishing to labour the gross details, Salman Obedi was said to have been blown to pieces and his decapitated torso apparently flew across the foyer and smashed into the doors to the main arena (seen on the right of the image above). It is my personal view that this image, allegedly taken in the the immediate aftermath of the attack, before the main emergency response arrived, is wholly inconsistent with the narrative we have been given.

None of the alleged victims are identifiable and, given the scale of the supposed death and destruction there isn’t anywhere near enough blood or human tissue evident. Indeed, there don’t appear to be enough people. None of the victims are noticeably bleeding, nor are there any deceased or injured children evident. Below is a picture of the aftermath of a bomb, allegedly detonated in by the IRA, in a Birmingham pub in 1973. It shows the blast damage from a device that killed many and injured many more.

While the size and construction of the buildings, and the explosives said to have been used, were completely different, one might reasonably expect the Manchester Arena bomb, if it was as described, to have at least damaged the Arena lights or cracked a window or two. The image below shows the sad sight witnesses encountered after emergency services had left the Hyde Park bombing in 1982. This bomb detonated outside and the damage to the parked vehicles is consistent with a bomb blast in an unconfined space.

The complete lack of structural damage in the Manchester Arena is not. In my opinion. What we have instead is a story and lots of eye witness accounts. Many of these accounts, such as the police radio exchanges on the night, are contradictory and do not support the official story. I and an increasing number of people who choose to support independent media and journalists like Richard D. Hall, do not give a toss what the government or the BBC insist that we believe. I would never harm anyone or advocate any crime and I am opposed to all violence. I will maintain my right to make up my own mind, thanks.

I refuse to pay for BBC propaganda and am not interested in its claims, assertions or even its opinions. I find its request that I “trust” it comical and quite pathetic. I have no faith in it at all. It has now got the the stage where I automatically assume it is lying, unless the evidence demonstrates it isn’t, which invariably it doesn’t. I certainly don’t automatically believe the BBC and don’t have any respect for it as an organisation. I fail to see how the BBC provides any kind of public service. Unless duping people into believing ridiculous myths is in the public interest.

Richard D. Hall investigated the explanations the Arena victims gave for their injuries because the evidence appears to show that the official narrative of the Manchester Arena bombing is totally absurd. He catalogued and examined that evidence in scrupulous detail and concluded that the supposed Manchester Arena bombing was a staged event. There was no dangerous bomb, just a pyrotechnic device, so how could anyone have been killed or injured by blast damage he asked.

As part of his investigation Hall politely requested interviews with the alleged victims. He made it clear to them that he doubted the government’s version of events and therefore, by extension, theirs. This was an opportunity for those individuals to provide the proof to rebut Hall’s own evidence-based opinion. They declined to be interviewed, as is their right, and so Hall’s investigation had to proceed without their voluntary participation.

Again, this is perfectly acceptable and quite standard practice in investigative journalism. Once they had declined the interview request, Richard D. Hall did not contact them again and respected their decision. He pointed this out in his response to the BBC hit piece. He maintains an ethical standard of conduct and does not harass people if they do not wish to talk to him.
Unlike the BBC.

Having berated Hall for intruding upon the grief and the loss of those it says were injured in the Arena, despite the fact that he did no such thing; having accused him of “trolling” them, although this wasn’t true either and, after alleging that he forced his opinions upon them against their wishes -another lie- the BBC then did exactly what it falsely accused Hall of doing by doorstepping him at his place of business.

Hall had previously and politely informed the BBC that he didn’t want to be interviewed by any of its representatives and has published the email exchanges to prove it. The BBC clearly does not hold itself to the same ethical standards that it disingenuously demands of others. The BBC filmed and broadcast the exchange with Hall and made a series of false allegations that he was “causing harm” to the victims.

The BBC alleged that Hall was somehow responsible for the behaviour of some apparent idiots who supposedly harassed these people online. The BBC pretended that they had a valid point, despite this being ludicrous bilge. I, for one, would be interested to see the evidence substantiating these claims that the victims were harangued online. With groups like 77th Brigade actively running propaganda campaigns on social media, I am not willing to accept either the BBC’s or the alleged victims’ accounts without seeing the evidence first. I want verifiable proof, clearly showing who harassed these supposed terror victims. The BBC didn’t provide any evidence in its “Disaster Trolls” of course.

I don’t doubt that some people are dumb enough to hurl abuse at people who say they were blown up, but I have no idea how that can possibly have anything to do with Richard D. Hall’s perfectly legitimate investigation. The BBC insisted that some sort of connection existed, but its only rationale for this appeared to be that if you publish something you are then responsible for whatever deranged act some random pillock subsequently carries out, if they claim they were inspired by what you said. Based upon this logic, then, presumably J. D Salinger is guilty of the murder of John Lennon. Or perhaps the BBC are guilty of the Manchester Arena bombing, seeing as they promoted the political ideology of Islamist extremists less than a year before the supposed attack.

The sad fact is, that despite the moronic, hypocritical gaslighting and projection of the BBC; regardless of its baseless accusations, its idiotic smears and groundless innuendo, the BBC’s “Disaster troll” propaganda will be enough to convince hundreds of thousands of people (if they still get that many viewers) who watched this trash. For some unfathomable reason, it seems a few people still “trust” the BBC. Who knows why?

Source with all the images: Iain Davis Substack Rant #2: The Disaster Trolls

For more information: 1. Questioning the official account - 2. One year of Global Health Tyranny. - 3. Brutal Health Totalitarianism. - 4. Six months of Global Health Tyranny - 5. Pandemic and Simulation Games: Preparation for a New Era? - Paul Schreyer. - 6. The shocking truth about Covid19: Discover how superrich criminals hav… - 7. Proof that the pandemic was planned with a purpose. - 8. Gates health empire, Luciferase, and Patent WO-2020-060606 - 9. German Lawyer Reiner Fuellmich Sues The World Over Coronavirus. Patric… - 10. New Normal: Pandemic Police State. All of the politicians and medical … - 11. Freedom Alliance Ireland against Plandemic. Lockdowns Are Quietly Imp… - 12. COVIDLAND - EPISODE 1: THE LOCKDOWN - Covidland: The Lockdown is part … - 13. "MONOPOLY: WHO OWNS THE WORLD" - Stop World Control: stopworldcontrol.… - 14. "What they hide from us about covid vaccines" - Some say that if, afte… - 15. "THE VACCINE DEATH REPORT" - EVIDENCE OF MILLIONS OF DEATHS AND HUNDRE… - 16. CLAIRE EDWARDS: THE COVID-19 GENOCIDE OF 2020 (See below the full tran… - 17. PLANDEMIC 2 INDOCTORNATION - SPANISH SUBTITLES - 18. CONSTRUCTION OF PANIC for World Governance - 19. MONOPOLY: AN OVERVIEW OF THE GREAT RESET - This informative video give… - 20. "BIG PHARMA: Exposing the Criminal Pharmaceutical Industry" - English … - 21. Documentary: "The new normality" - WITH SPANISH SUBTITLES. - 22. "The only safe vaccine is a vaccine that is never used" - With Spanish… - 23. The Price of Panic Breakout Session from Freedom Summit 2020 - Jay Ric… - 24. CORONA WORLD ORDER - What we are witnessing with this "global health c… - 25. Vernon Coleman, "The Old Man in the Chair": London Speech July 24, 202… - 26. UK Plandemic Brainwashing - Miles Christi - 03/25/2021 - 27. THE NEW NORMAL - A DOCUMENTARY BY HAPPEN.NETWORK - 28. "PLANET LOCKDOWN" - With Spanish Subtitles - Source: WATCH THE FILM – Planet Lockdown Documenta… - 29. "PSEUDOPANDEMIC: New Normal Technocracy" - By Iain Davis - 2021 - Sources: 1. "Pseudopandemic" - … - 30. THE PANDEMIC GREAT DECEIT: THE COVID VIRUS HAS NEVER BEEN ISOLATED - 31. Documental EL PLAN: La OMS ha planeado 10 años de "pandemias" - Top experts are warning humanity … - 32."PLANDEMIC: GRAND JURY EVIDENCE" - Lawyers and top experts reveal evidence for world dictatorship. … - 33. “The 2020-22 Worldwide Corona Crisis” - 34. "Miles - Christi - English 2021" - 35. 20 Years After 9/11 - 36. “The Covid Lies” - Dr. Mike Yeadon - April 10, 2022 - In this comprehensive review, Dr. Yeadon … - 37. EL GRAN REINICIO (English with Spanish subtitles) - 38. Two Years of Global Health Tyranny"

Para más información: 1. "Dieciocho meses de Tiranía Sanitaria Mundial" - Miles Christi - 15/09… - 2. La triple mentira plandémica. - 3. Boletín informativo VII. - 4. La verdad sobre la "pandemia". - 5. "Cronología Target Covid-19" - Realizado por: Junta Argentina de Revis… - 6. Miles Christi 2020-2021: Una selección temática. - 7. "Estudio de la pandemia: análisis científico independiente" - Sergio P… - 8. Vacuna Covid: Crimen Contra la Humanidad. - 9. Lo que nos ocultan sobre las "vacunas" covid. Algunos dicen que si, de… - 10. Boletín informativo VIII. - 11. "El relato pandémico" - Nicolás Ponsiglione - Este es un libro muy rec… - 12. "INFORME DE MUERTES POR VACUNAS" - 13. PLANDEMIC 2 INDOCTORNATION - SPANISH SUBTITLES - 14. NO a la vacunación obligatoria. - 15. PLANDEMIA: El objetivo que persigue la élite. - 16. LAS VACUNAS COVID SON UNA EMPRESA CRIMINAL. - 17. LA CONSTRUCCION DEL PANICO para la Gobernanza Mundial - 18. PLANDEMIA: CRONOLOGÍA DE UN GENOCIDIO PROGRAMADO - 19. "BIG PHARMA: Poniendo al descubierto la criminal industria farmacéutic… - 20. ASESINADOS: EL DOCUMENTAL. En este documental, brillantemente conducid… - 21. Documental: "La nueva normalidad". - 22. "Event 201" - Simulacro de pandemia de coronavirus organizado por la F… - 23. "Miles Christi 2021" - 24. "HISTORIA Y OBJETIVOS DE LA FALSA PANDEMIA" - El abogado Reiner Fuellmich entrevista a la investiga… - 25. El ABC de la plandemia - 26. "PLANETA CONFINADO" / "PLANET LOCKDOWN" - Valioso documental acerca del atentado terrorista … - 27. "Covid: el engaño más grande en la historia de la salud" - 28. Documental EL PLAN: La OMS ha planeado 10 años de "pandemias" - Top experts are warning humanity … - 29. "¡Despierta! Cómo las élites están controlando el mundo" - 30. EL GRAN REINICIO - 31. A 20 años del atentado terrorista del 11-S - 32. 2020-2022: Dos años de Miles Christi - 33. "Dos años de Tiranía Sanitaria Mundial"

Pour plus d'information: 1. Un an de Tyrannie Sanitaire Mondiale. - 2. Totalitarisme Sanitaire Brutal. - 3. Tyrannie Sanitaire Mondiale - 4. Radio-Québec - Nuremberg 2.0, les procès COVID commencent. - 5. L’étau se resserre sur la clique de Davos - 6. Le Docteur Louis Fouché explique pourquoi il ne se fera pas vacciner -… - 7. La fraude du test PCR et de la "pandémie" de covid - Dossier préparé par Germán Sarlangue. - 8. VACCINATION COVID-19, LE CRIME PARFAIT - 9. HOLD-UP - Retour sur un chaos - 2è version. - 10. MANIGANCE-19: La vidéo qui dénonce la grande manipulation COVID-19 - 11. Le "vaccin" covid, est-il sûr? Rien n'est moins sûr... - Voir aussi: 1… - 12. "PRIMUM NON NOCERE" - Suite du documentaire "HOLD UP" (1. HOLD-UP - Re… - 13. "30 faits que vous devez savoir : Une fiche d’information sur le COVID." - 14. Comité d'investigation de Reiner Fuellmich - 15. LA CONSTRUCTION DE LA PANIQUE pour la Gouvernance Mondiale - 16. Des signaux de fréquences Bluetooth ou analogue chez les personnes aya… - 17. SPORTIFS PROFESSIONNELS ET OLYMPIQUES DÉCÉDÉS OU GRAVEMENT BLESSÉS AU … - 18. "VACCINS: UN PLAN MONDIAL" - Transcription audio de l’article du magaz… - 19. Scandale chez Merck: une ancienne cadre, Brandy Vaughan, avoue tout - … - 21. Documentaire "Planet Lockdown" - Version doublée en français - Partie 1/4 - Source, avec les trois … - 22. Vaccins et virus – Nouveau Monde - 23. Une épidémie de mensonges - 24. "2013-2022: Neuf ans avec François" - 25. La laïcité contre Dieu, l'Église et la France - 26. La doctrine de l’âme chez Saint Thomas d’Aquin - Miles Christi.