Why did the BBC make the initial programme? The BBC never break stories, this is the realm of the independents.
They had a computer programmer dissect sensor cards and he couldn't find anything programmable, why would he know what he was looking for? They may as well have had a butcher take it apart and comment. If you were shown a DVD, would you know what was on it unless you had the appropriate reader.
The explosives expert, yes he is an explosives expert but not an expert in detection based on the GT200 method.
Again, the general public would not know the difference but it makes a good story doesn't it.
Now let us look further back in time and see what the BBC have been up to that they failed to mention.
Shortly after 9 11 they contact the British Army to see if there was anything new and interesting. Guess what they replied! Yes, we have something interesting, it is called the Mole and we would be prepared to present it on Tomorrows World, a prime time, widely recognised science programme of the day.
The REEST seek approval and get it from the chain of command to present it on the BBC programme.
How did the REEST get approval; the Mole must have worked or why would the UK Ministry of Defence show something that was completely useless.
Remember this is 2 years after the REEST made the report on a device that was useless!
Confusing isn't it, why show it when it doesn't work. Well by now even you must be able to answer that one easily.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gdIhnqaBM8&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Is this the programme the BBC tried to erase? Why is it not on their archives?
Interesting that the BBC have never explained they were party to a massive amount of exposure to the Mole.
John Gregg
He stated that he couldn't understand how it worked, like it was paranormal. He did not believe in paranormal but would keep an open mind.
Strange how moving forward 10 years at the trial he things differently.
He thought the BBC set him up, he thought it was a scam, don't remember that being said on the programme. He was asked why he did not just walk away from the programme if he thought it was just a wind up. He said he had promised the BBC he would comment. What an idiot, if you thought it was a scam, you would walk away BBC or not.
He was a prosecution witness. When asked why his view was different now to then he said 'I have to consider my reputation and that of Oxford University'. So now he is scared to admit that he saw it work, cannot state how and like every other narrow minded scientist says it couldn't possibly work despite the fact that the army presented it and he was happy previously to say people have to keep an open mind.
Mr John Gregg has not got an open mind, he has seen it work, cannot explain it and now since the media highlighted the case has chosen to do a u turn. Coward.
Why did the BBC not mention this programme.
Did the government colude with the BBC make a massive fuss of the issue and as they are Nationlised can be controlled? The government accepted the lies they stated on Newsnight and just like every other news organisation failed to actually look into the subject properly as they need a new story, a new victim every 24 hours, read through the various reports, carefully look at the accuracy and you will see confusion about which company has done what, who sold to who and a good example is the BBC stating Global Technical Ltd made £45 million.
How stupid and lazy. Look at the records in companies house and see the actual turnover. See how different the truth is, but who really cares about the truth. We just accept blindly what we are fed and do not question anything.
Here the government know the BBC have lied but it suits the occasion so let it go.
The media are not expected to be truthful, exactly why there was a Leveson enquiry.
Collusion with the UK Police
but MOD is trying to back peddle
