"The Downfall of Richard D Hall"

 

See here for essential background: https://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.com/2024/07/rdh-lawsuit-mini-portal.html.
Neil Sanders and Brent Lee have made a new three-part show about Richard D Hall on their podcast Some Dare Call it Conspiracy. The two ex-conspiracy theorists released it onto their free platforms at the same time as their Patreon site which is unusual for them. They normally let their supporters see the product first. They must have decided that there is some urgency in publishing this assessment. They are joined on the programme by an Australian called Joel Hill, who has appeared on some of their previous shows. Joel contributes nothing rational to the discussion at all; he just pops up every so often to declare some kind of emotional reaction to whatever is being talked about, saying that conspiracy theorists are "despicable!"... "Insane!"...  "Fuckwits!"... "Cringe!"... "Obnoxious!"... As I've said before, this is pure sentimental rhetoric and falls well below the standards of people who preen themselves for being knowers of "how science works!", see: https://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.com/2011/10/how-to-show-respect-to-victims-of-911.html. As usual the show's content involves Neil delivering an extensive monologue with a very occasional interjection by Brent and Joel. Neil Gish-gallops so many points that I lost count; but hardly any of them are relevant to Richard's current situation anyway. Almost the entire first episode is simply a rehash of subject matter that the duo have covered on previous programmes, namely Neil's general criticism of Richard's ideas (mostly incorrect in my view). It is not until the forty-five minute mark that the subject of Richard's trial is first mentioned; in fact, unless you are a newcomer to the Conspirasphere and have no previous knowledge of it, I recommend skipping the episode until then. Even then, Neil only spends a minute or two on the subject and then goes off on a tangent again until early in the third part. The three presenters believe it was justified to accuse Richard of his supposed harassment. Not libel; harassment. Filming outside the claimants' home was "doxing" apparently, even though Richard only went there once and never published the video he took from a public area. They also support the court's decision to prevent Richard tabling his full evidence package. Neil mentions my own report and how I compare the situation to Ernst Zündel. However, he wrongly states that I am comparing the two men and not the two legal cases. He also fails to grasp how the court's dismissal of Zündel's defence is given the very same justification as that of Richard's. He skips over the part where I describe the dark energy of the courthouse. He claims that we should just trust the authorities when they say that the evidence is decided. When they want to hide something from us that might prove or disprove a suspicion; they just doing it for the sake of our feelings. I stated that a large proportion of the public question the Manchester Arena event. He said: "So what? Millions of the American public just voted for Donald Trump."... Yes, precisely! That is how freedom-loving and independently thinking those wonderful Americans are. Source: https://open.spotify.com/episode/62bvOgVjnHLVIsAcIxfkYo.
 
Neil punctuates this supposed empirical and parsimonious analysis with his own propagandistic language. Like Joel, he doesn't see any problem with mixing the two and cannot understand the fallacy he is committing. At one point he says in response to the accusation that this whole court case is merely a pretext for censorship, which of course I assert myself: "Richard, you're not Nelson Mandela, you just told everybody no kids died!"... "You despicable pieces of shit!"... "Fuck you both!... You failed at humanity!" There is a strange message when reading between the lines of Neil, Brent and Joel's conversation; a weird kind of agreement with me. I knew from the start, and this was confirmed to me as the court case went on, that the only reason this legal attack on Richard is taking place is because the government want to destroy him personally and create a legal landscape in which it is impossible to disagree publicly with the establishment narrative on any subject they decide. Neil, Brent and Joel say this is not true, but in the very same breath constantly refer back to the tragedy of the Manchester Arena incident, the pain caused to the grieving relatives and the survivors by people doubting it, and the disrespect it shows to the memory of those who allegedly died. But surely this issue has nothing to do with that, does it? It's purely about Richard's action and words towards the claimants; not his opinions, isn't it? We were specifically told that in court. Neil repeats this two-tier argument when he compares Richard's trial to that of Alex Jones, a comparison that I have also pointed out, see: https://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.com/2022/08/alex-jones-in-court.html. Therefore the three presenters are contradicting themselves. They are essentially admitting, in their own way, that this is very much about punishing Richard D Hall for expressing an opinion. At the time of writing, Richard has written a post explaining how the amount of money he really owes is many times what I said in the RDH Sentenced article. It adds up to so much more because of all the costs. There has also been an injunction ordering him to remove "certain material" from his website. I could not attend the sentencing hearing because of work commitments and the lack of notice, but a friend of mine was there and she told me that this injunction is an "open-ended" one. The court could decide to add more for Richard to delete at any time wholly at their discretion. (This is surprisingly similar to what happened to me when I was discharged from Hospital Portering, see: https://hpanwo-hpwa.blogspot.com/2022/01/ten-years-on.html.) If this whole affair was not intended to ruin Richard financially and stop his research and media work, then in what way could it have done a better job if it were? I feel awful for Richard and will do anything I can to help him in this time of need, but the sheer volume of the penalty looks truly insurmountable at the moment. Neil, Brent and Joel clearly have no such desire. They appear pleased that "justice has been done!" Yet things always come out of left field. When Richard D Hall is vindicated, along with the rest of the Conspirasphere, and the New World Order is finally defeated. Those who assisted with the Illuminati agenda, knowingly or not, will be held lawfully accountable. I wonder how Neil, Brent and Joel will fair at their own trial.
See here for background: https://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.com/2024/06/conspiracy-theory-and-culture.html.
And: https://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.com/2023/09/conspiracy-theory-deprogramming.html.