Richard D Hall’s excellent show has been on the air (in one form or another) for several years now and has done much to awaken folk to the larger realities of the world around us. Delivered with an informed and level headed honesty, combined with a wickedly dry wit, Richplanet has enlightened many to concepts like false flag terrorism, the flawed monetary system, media perceptual management, free-energy technology and the UFO question. Richard has interviewed a myriad of alternative researchers including; Dr Judy Wood, Andrew Johnson, Neil Sanders, Ian R Crane, Rupert Sheldrake, Anthony Beckett, Dave Hodrien and Ben Emlyn Jones, to name a few. He studied engineering at Newcastle University and spent twenty years in the profession, predominantly in software development.
Richard has recently concluded a UK wide tour and I was fortunate to be able to catch part of this latest tour when he stopped off in Birmingham. This year, the talk was one of two halves. The first hour consisted of a round-up of the current state of global affairs, including several major examples of the main mechanisms at work that perpetuate the current “truth stalemate”.
He began with a brief look at some recent news and commented on the Woolwich incident only by saying; “without a doubt, MI5 would have provided the tomato ketchup!” The first hour was entitled “The 9/11 Cover Up, The Media and Money”. Richard highlighted the main problem being availability and reliability of information, with the central issue - the modus operandi of the mainstream media. Controlled by a handful of individuals, there is very little truth seeking in the mainstream media. He stresses that he doesn’t have an answer to this problem, which is why he puts out as much information on his show in the hope that one day someone will come up with a viable answer.
He admits that he has covered 9/11 (particularly the work of Dr Judy Wood) a lot in his shows, for a very good reason. The nature of perceptual management via the mainstream media is reflected perfectly in the 9/11 subject. Obviously many believe that Osama Bin Laden was involved in orchestrating 9/11 and he suggests that the evidence needed to present to these type of people is sometimes different from what is needed to examine the true nature of how and why the cover-up is orchestrated. Richard explained that this aspect of the talk would be geared toward ‘how’ certain parties have gone about covering up 9/11 evidence.
He, quite rightly, stated from the outset that the research of Dr Judy Wood (former professor of engineering mechanics) is the most comprehensive and detailed evidence currently available in the public domain. He also pointed to the seismic data and the largely undamaged state of the “bathtub wall” (the structure surrounding the area which includes the WTC complex and prevents the Hudson River from flooding the location) as particularly telling, as well as evidence that disproves all theories about the use of bombs, thermite, controlled demolition and mini-nukes in aiding the destruction of the twin towers. Her book (“Where Did the Towers Go?”) is, I believe, the definitive place to start if you want to find out what really happened on 9/11. Richard also showed some clips from interviews he has done with her on his show.
You can view Dr Wood’s most recent appearances on Richplanet TV at these links:
Dr Judy Wood - Energy weapon used on 9/11 & the cover up
Dr Judy Wood - A lecture about WHAT happened on 9/11
Dr Judy Wood - A lecture about WHAT happened on 9/11 - Part 2
As Richard highlights, how interesting it is that (within 48 hours of the events) the BBC “think they know the mechanism that the towers disappeared.” This theory is still on the BBC’s website to this day. As he says; “compare that with ten years of research from a qualified professor of engineering mechanics. Five hundred pages, all the scientific evidence… this (holding up the piece from the BBC website) is laughable! I wouldn’t wipe my arse on this!”
He goes on to describe that the real evidence of 9/11 is classified technology that was used to destroy the towers. Moreover, it is technology that those in the know are still trying to keep classified. “They use it, they put it on display, and they say; right, there are going to be some people who will see through this. Like Professor Wood. So we’re gonna have to handle them.”
The 9/11 cover up is aimed at those who don’t believe the official narrative… aimed at people who analyse things critically. This has been done by creating bogus groups and researchers to steer those questioning the official narrative toward more conventional “explanations”. This is how part of the 9/11 cover-up has been handled. Richard also reminded the audience that intelligence agencies are well practiced in setting up fake websites, companies, and pressure groups, often with scientists on-board. He also showed how some of these scientists have campaigned with various groups to “re-investigate” 9/11. As he points out, subsequent “investigations” have been a whitewash so why would a “re-investigation” be any different?
Andrew Johnson has worked tirelessly to expose this side of the cover-up, having experienced some of the mechanisms of these groups first hand. He came to understand that certain groups and individuals were working to manipulate and muddle legitimate questions and research about 9/11. The evidence is documented in his book “9/11 – Finding the Truth”.
Richard also emphasised the importance of Dr Judy Wood’s RFC. On March 16th, 2007, NIST logged the receipt of a Request for Correction (RFC) to their WTC reports by Dr Wood. Her RFC laid out the evidence of one or more Directed Energy Weapons being used to destroy most or all of the WTC Complex. Any scientist can submit a Request for Correction. Dr Judy Wood challenged NIST’s report, which subsequently knocked it back. Dr Wood appealed against the decision not to include her RFC. The appeal was also knocked back.
As Richard illustrates, “the only avenue open to a scientist then is to take legal action. To sue the contractors who were involved in writing that report for science fraud - which is what Dr Wood did. She took it to a local court, the judge threw it out and he came up with ridiculous comments about the moon landings. Then she paid $5,000 (for document preparation) to have it heard at the appeal court, but the appeal was denied. Then she took it to the Supreme Court. So the point is that she’s taken it to every court in the land (United States) to try and get this evidence in. You’re probably not going to win against the government if the government have had a hand in it in the first place. So the point is, she was prepared to put her evidence in a court and take it through every legal process.”
Interestingly, on April 12th, 2007 (just a few weeks after she submitted her first RFC), Dr Steven Jones, Kevin Ryan and Richard Gage submitted a RFC to NIST’s WTC reports. These three individuals were promoting the ‘thermite’ theory. Richard noted that Dr Steven Jones was involved in covering up a discovery in 1989 which (had it been developed at the time) would have now seen us “driving around in cars NOT powered by petrol… it was one of the most important discoveries of the 20th century. This guy, Steven E. Jones, was instrumental in covering that up.”
In Richard’s words; “This group, in my opinion, have only challenged the government report because they’ve seen that Judy Wood has… Their RFC does not mention thermite in the content of their research, but only as an arbitrary example of a hypothetical analogy. In other words they were being extremely tentative about saying; yes, we think it was thermite. They didn’t really say that. They did not take it to court either. They didn’t take legal action which is what Dr Judy Wood did. They didn’t take it to the local court. They didn’t take it to the appeal court. They didn’t take it to the Supreme Court. So they weren’t prepared to stand in a court and say ‘we think bombs or thermite destroyed these towers.’ You have got to put that in mind when you’re deciding who you think is actually speaking the truth here.”
He also discussed Abraham Rodriguez who wrote to Richard Gage of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth regarding Dr Judy Wood’s research. Rodriguez had supported the AE911 group’s petition for a “New Investigation”, but his name was “silently” deleted from the petition after he wrote to Gage. Rodriguez subsequently challenged Gage on this issue at one of his talks, raising the magnetometer information, the patterns of destruction at the WTC Complex, the Bathtub Wall, and so on. Gage replied; “I’m not gonna present every piece of evidence out there that I can’t explain. What good would that do me or you!?” Rodriguez also asked him why he hadn’t presented the thermite perspective in a court of law (relating to the RFC). He replied; “We are Architects and Engineers! We have produced the evidence for you to do whatever you want to do with it!” He then starts to talk about his time and what he earns and finally says that this kind of questioning confuses people and distracts them from “evidence that we believe is more solid….” He also says that “we do censor people’s profiles.”
Richard then discussed the Horsham Hearing in February 2013. This involved an individual named Tony Rooke who wasn’t happy with how the BBC covered the events of 9/11, so he decided not to pay his TV license in protest. Richard believes that Rooke has been misled in some manner. At the hearing, roughly one hundred people turned up in support.
Henshall sent out emails to people who might be attending the Court Hearing. In one email he said that at least one mainstream media crew would be in attendance. So he knew beforehand that there would be a mainstream media presence in some form. Through Henshall’s email message, Tony Rooke asked attendees beforehand, NOT to talk to the media and NOT to hold up placards “which do not represent his views… activist attending the hearing are asked to make sure that any signs represent the message of his campaign: that the BBC has covered up the truth about 9/11. Those with signs saying anything speculative to a general audience (e.g.: 9/11 was in inside job) would be seen as undermining the court case.”
Richard believes that it shouldn’t be too hard to find out who the people in the photograph (holding the banner) are – after all, the UK 9/11 activist community does not number in the millions. He placed an appeal on his TV show to find out who they were. He had one email reply after the appeal – from Tony Rooke. Rooke told him he was a bit annoyed by the suggestions that there may be a double cover up angle, that Richard was being used by certain parties to put out a false view. Richard replied, asking him why he hadn’t brought the evidence presented by Dr Judy Wood into the courts. Richard also said that he wanted to know who the guys holding up the banner were. “You’re standing their holding the poster with these guys; you must know who they are.”
Rooke replied; “I don’t know who the f*** did what, used what, to do what on 9/11! But I do know the official story stinks. I am very unpopular with a few 9/11 groups because I will not follow Dr Judy Wood, weapons of whatever, or holograms… because I do not care! I have no idea who brought the banner, nor do I know the identity of the man behind the Guy Fawkes mask.”
Richard then decided to email Ian Henshall to see if he could shed any light on the matter, asking him if he knew who made the poster or who was holding it up. Henshall replied: “No. I don’t know who they are. They asked me what I thought of the poster and I said personally I do not think a lot of it, but they should ask Tony. I assumed from this picture that they had Tony’s approval.” Richard emailed him again to thank him for his response and reiterated his desire to identify those in the picture. He asked him if he would send him his distribution list in order to ask people on the list if they knew the identity of those pictured. Richard is still awaiting his reply…
It is curious that Henshall is on record as saying that; “Andrew Johnson is personally the biggest single cause of the collapse of the 9/11 truth campaign in the UK.” Knowing Andrew as I do, I personally find this statement absolutely ludicrous! Richard’s response was simply to press his “bulls*** detector” button! He also noted that Henshall’s father worked for MI5 and his mother also worked for British Intelligence. Curious that…
Richard believes that, at some level, a decision has been made to allow certain aspects of 9/11 research into the mainstream media. Providing it suits the media’s preferred agenda. This raised the larger issue of media control. He discussed 7/7 and the amazingly coincidental circumstances that surrounded Peter Power’s mock terror drill exercises that just happened to take place on the same day, at the same time, in the same locations. Surely just random chance that one!! Richard has been running a long campaign encouraging people to “tell your MP about 7/7”. He was surprised, upon approaching his own MP, to learn that they knew nothing of the evidence that contradicts the 7/7 official narrative.
I have written pages upon pages about the Olympics (from all conceivable angles!) on this website and discussed the G4S aspect in my talk late last year. Although I agree with Richard, the whole build up to the Games reveals something far more bizarre specifically directed at truth seekers. I also have some circumstantial evidence suggesting that certain researchers helped to contrive the initial events, either knowingly or unwittingly.
Another example of cross-pollination between alternative and mainstream media is in the form of ridicule and debunking. Richard talked at length in last year’s tour about the nature of the “hit piece”. He also talked about infiltration of the alternative media with “copycat” radio, internet and TV shows. He is investigating the subject currently but believes he doesn’t have enough evidence yet to fully implicate certain parties. The understanding here is that intelligence agencies and the like, have a real degree of control over the mainstream media now, but they haven’t yet cracked the alternative media – a situation that they seem to be working very hard to correct. Richard noted that the moves are now being made on the internet. This is obvious really given how much exposure to the masses it now gets.
Richard covered aspects of media control in his previous 2012 Tour which can be viewed here: RDH's 2012 Tour Fake power politics, and a woeful corrupt media - http://www.richplanet.net/starship_main.php?ref=125&part=1
One of the main aspects that appears to have reared its head currently, is (as Richard calls it) “The Phoney Bone of Contention”. This is a contrived controversy over two seemingly opposing viewpoints, encouraged in order to divert attention away from a third viewpoint which is being concealed. Sometimes controversy and discussion over two seemingly opposing viewpoints is encouraged, in order to reinforce credibility of a subtextual issue, which is itself a fake construct. A good example of the latter point is the mainstream approach to 7/7.
Richard cites the BBC’s “Question Time” (or “Questionable Time” as he puts it!) as a perfect example of “The Phoney Bone of Contention”. The choices of two opposing viewpoints are spoon fed to us (much like the farcical “choosing” of political parties to vote into government), completely sidestepping the larger issue.
The political framework was touched upon at this point, with the larger mechanism of money as the central issue. Here, he clarifies the real solutions to “economic woes”: end fractional reserve banking, end the use of the usury system, and allow governments to issue currency – rather the current system of borrowing it. He highlights another problem for humanity, which is the amount of time and money it takes to accumulate “stuff”. How much stuff do we really need? Our desire for “stuff” has been artificially inflated requiring larger amounts of money and therefore more time spent working to earn the money for the “stuff”. This why we have so little spare time and ultimately why we have so little time to stop and think about the predicament or truly how to get out of it. Free time gives us the opportunity to think, critically analyse and learn.
He also underlines the problem by exposing the mentality of ruling elites - quoting Zbigniew Brzezinski (from his 1969 book: Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technotronic Era); “The challenge for government in the future will be to prevent man from effectively discovering his true self, and keeping humanity locked in consumerist materialism.”
Richard also took the opportunity to quickly look over the testimony of Lisa French and the tragic shooting in the face of P.C. David Rathband. He looked at this subject in depth in last year’s talk and is a subject worthy of a talk in its own right.
Richard also redressed some of the research of alternative historians Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett and talked about a £50,000 reward which has been made available by one of their supporters, to anyone who can provide information that leads to a conviction for the attempted murder of Baram Blackett on Sunday 14th August, 2011.
You can previous aspects of Richard’s Wilson and Blackett coverage here:
Wilson & Blackett - The Wilson & Blackett Conspiracy - http://www.richplanet.net/starship_main.php?ref=127&part=1
The second hour of the talk was an analysis of his latest investigation into some of the UK’s more recent UFO sightings, including emphasis on the bizarre “black triangle” phenomenon. Much of this work has been collected together for his latest documentary film; “Almost Identified Flying Objects” and includes witness testimony and interviews with a number of those people involved. These sightings consist of over 350 reports that have been received by Richard over the last two and a half years. “Without any doubt there are silent, aerial vehicles, some of them triangular, some of them huge proportions, in our skies which are not being flown from UK military bases.” Interestingly, Richard put out the blurb for the film on his website on the 10th May.
On the 14th May, the Mail Online published an article (including images and a video): “US stealth drones launched from aircraft carrier by remote control.” He expounded how this article would have been sanctioned (probably put out) by the UK’s Ministry of Defence to make people aware that craft of this type are being flown from aircraft carriers. In the images, the technicians are wearing earmuffs; this is because the craft has a large and very loud jet engine. Perhaps less than coincidentally, the craft appears triangular in shape. Richard maintains that this has been put out there to “muddy the waters”, a kind of plausible deniability, especially if you look at the testimonies he has investigated for the film.
The initial volume of reports he received was immediately halved given that they could easily be explained as misidentified Chinese lanterns and remote control model aircraft type devices. Some of these latter devices are capable of extraordinary manoeuvrability with some enthusiasts even attaching coloured L.E.D. lights to them so they can be flown at night.
“Probably the most controversial aspect of the UFO subject is whether or not some UFOs are non-human in origin. And people who won’t entertain that view generally use the argument; ‘well, it’s much too far to the nearest star (four light years away) and no one can travel anywhere near the speed of light so it would be impossible for them to get here. Why wouldn’t they just land on The White House lawn?’ These are the sort of arguments people use. They’re pretty narrow-minded arguments because they assume that we know everything about physics and we know everything about the universe… and we definitely don’t. The other thing it ignores is the possibility that they are closer than we think, that there may be bases in the solar system or even on the earth.”
Richard also addressed the possibility of collaboration between possible ETs and terrestrial branches of the military and intelligence agencies. He looked at some of the witness testimony of the Roswell event as an example of where this collaboration may have originated. Certainly there is evidence showing that elements of whatever crashed in 1947 ended up in the hands of various branches of the military / industrial complex. He also mentioned Bob Lazar who claims to have witnessed nine craft being stored at S4 near Area 51. Lazar’s job was allegedly to try and decipher the propulsion system of one of the craft. Lazar’s story has recently been corroborated by a CIA official who gave information to UFO researcher Richard Dolan showing how he was sent to S4 under the orders of President Eisenhower. Richard also discussed the testimony of Dan Sherman who appeared to have once been drafted into a top secret NSA project involving “intuitive communication”, where he was trained to mentally mimic certain tones eventually allowing him to interface his mind with technology and control it. There was no technological interface and appears to have been one of an almost “psychic” nature.
Michael Schratt (Aerospace historian) was also mentioned. He has documented numerous cases of “secret aircraft”, most of which covers declassified craft built by Lockheed Skunk Works during the 1980s. In his research, Schratt discusses the TAV low-Earth orbital craft, amongst other examples and also covers the TR3B. Richard says that many people dismiss the idea of ET UFOs as sightings of experimental aircraft. Some people ask why test craft would be flown over civilian populations centres in the UK. It was revealed that a US top secret spy plane crashed at the Boskam Down experimental aircraft base in Hampshire in 1994. There was also an experimental aircraft crash in East Germany in 1989. This does explain many aspects of the phenomenon, although as Richard says, “it doesn’t explain all of them.”
The case files used in his documentary film were gathered between August 2010 and December 2012. There were initially 350 reports - 188 were discarded as explainable or didn’t have enough information to warrant investigation, whilst 162 remained in the database. Of the 162, he was able to conduct 25 lengthy telephone interviews and interview 12 on film. As part of the research, he also interviewed three prominent UFO researchers: Dave Hodrien, Gary Heseltine and John Hanson (the latter two are retired police detectives.)
The 162 reports were broken down into four categories: Spheres, Black Triangles, Discs/Saucers, and others. The most common was the sphere – broken into categories of small (football sized), medium (bigger than a car), large (bigger than a house) and multiple spheres. Some of these appeared metallic in form; others had the consistency of glowing balls of energy. The triangle sightings fell into two categories: the typical size being described as “the size of a football pitch”; with the others smaller. There was a number of what he calls “classic flying saucer” cases- categorised as either small or large.
Many of the triangle sightings were black in colour, usually silent, often with a number of “lights” on the corners or along the edges. Richard described how triangle sightings became more prominent from the late 1970s onward, with a “flap” in the Hudson Valley region of New York State in 1981. There was also an infamous spate of sightings in Belgium in 1990, some photographed in relatively high quality. F16 fighter jets were scrambled by the Belgium Air Force to try and intercept these craft but were outmanoeuvred in every case. Professor Emile Schweitzer, one of Belgium’s leading radar experts examined the aircraft data and concluded that these were real returns from real objects moving around the sky. One case recorded a craft doing a full speed sharp 90 degree angle turn upwards. If a craft moving in a normal Newtonian manner had tried doing such a thing, the acceleration (a turn a 30gs) would have instantly killed anybody inside the craft. Schweitzer concluded that he didn’t know how that could have been done with the then currently “known” level of technology. Schweitzer was asked to meet with MoD officials and a video interview was recorded with him.
In 1988, there was a “flap” in Staffordshire (my corner of the world and I remember it well!), specifically Cannock Chase. In 1997, there was another prominent case in Sheffield. Evidence shows, again, that UK military fighter jets were scrambled to intercept. There is evidence that one of the chase planes in this incident actually crashed on or near Howden Moor.
Richard then showed the video witness testimonies included in the film. There is a huge amount of information here, so I am just going to give an overview of some of the key factors. However, the film is well worth watching if you are interested in the subject. The film is available to purchase from Richplanet.net and Richard hopes to air it on Showcase TV (Sky Channel 191 / Freesat Channel 400) at some point during June.
“Almost Identified Flying Objects” -
The key aspect of the triangle phenomenon seems to be the lack of noise. In a few cases, a low pitch humming could be heard. Some appeared to be structured with “girder” like characteristics across the surface; others appeared to have no rivets or joins to the overall structure. They usually appeared to move at a very slow speed, almost as if they were “drifting” across the sky on a set course. It was often noted that there were no emissions or smells. Some craft appeared to “wobble” or “shimmer”, possibly as a result of some sort of field based propulsion system. Some craft were witnessed as close as 100 feet away. Some flew in pairs, groups of pairs, or overall groups. Many were described as “football pitch” sized are much larger. One witness recounts how a triangle flew over his car and he subsequently lost three hours of time. He awoke the next morning with a triangular mark on his chest.
The evidence seems to indicate certain hotspot regions in the UK. The West Yorkshire / Lancashire border region is one particular area. They are also grouped areas of sightings spanning Staffordshire, Derbyshire, Lancashire and Cheshire. Richard also drew attention to the mountainous terrain north of Todmorden, particularly interesting given the number of lakes and sparse population. Jenny Randles’ “Pennine UFO Mystery” was cited. This occurrence at Ogden Reservoir in 1980 has given a number of UFO researchers cause to wonder that there may be more to the region. Richard speculated if the reservoir or a nearby lake might serve as an access point for craft to launch from / land in a subterranean hanger of sorts. This also brought up the myriad of discussions regarding witness sightings of craft rising into and out of several Earth oceans and also the theories about the Antarctic region housing various bases. Richard talked about the various sightings over war-torn regions and showed the RT News footage of triangular objects over Palestine.
With regard to the sphere sightings, some appeared like small “ball bearings”; whilst others glowed. They often hovered low to the ground, followed by sharp changes in speed and direction. There is a concentrated area of these sightings in the South Wales region. The disc sightings varied in characteristics. They were usually metallic in appearance but varied in size. Their movement was fluid and capable of sharp direction and speed changes. There appears to a number of interesting disc encounters in Scotland. In October 2000, discs were witnessed across a wide region. It is curious that the witness reported that on the same day, a Merlin helicopter crashed nearby, as did two fighter jets – which crashed in the border region.
The remainder of the talk was given over to some of the more famous UK cases (such as the Berwyn Mountain case) and circumstances where UFO researchers appear to have been persuaded to join the Ministry of Defence or Intelligence Services’ payroll and start to muddle and debunk cases. On occasion, some have changed their views on UFOs completely. Richard declined to divulge names however, due the possibility of libel cases. Although he did say that if you look hard enough, you can figure out who they are!
The talk ended with a thought provoking perspective from Richard: with all the emphasis on gathering evidence (despite the efforts and validity of the current methods), it may be that we have missed a key factor that could lead to the answers. As Richard simply asks; “Where are these craft going? Where are they located when not in flight?” Certainly in the case of the oft-slow moving triangles, is it not possible to narrow down the area and find out for ourselves? Oftentimes, the simplest solutions are the most obvious! In his opinion, this may be crucial to finding quantifiable evidence and blowing the lid off the whole phenomenon.
Afterwards, Richard took many interesting and varied questions from the audience and even turned the floor over to Andrew Johnson and Dave Hodrien (who were also in the audience) for a number of specific questions. At the end, Andrew (Johnson) made the comment that he thought that one thing in common between the Flying Triangle Phenomenon and the investigations into 9/11 is that they can reveal the use of advanced, black technology that has the potential to change the world completely - if the reality of such technology was known and accepted by the general population.
All in all, it was a thoroughly informative and enjoyable day, and a testament to the hard work of Richard D Hall and Richplanet TV. Long may the show (and his work) continue! I must also say a big thank you to Andrew Johnson who got me there and back safely on the day. It’s always good to catch up again my friend! I am working hard on writing a book at the moment and I had the chance to discuss with Richard the possibility of my being on the show at some point later in the year and talking about the subject of my book. Although still tentative at the moment (I’m only part way through writing it!), hopefully it will be something to look forward to. I will let you know more as and when, so watch this space…
Until Next Time!
The Truth Seeker’s Guide.