Hillsborough, The Man Under The Table.

Go to 5:25 in this video for an account of the man under the table.



There is a huge media smear campaign underway that was intended to drive an ever bigger wedge between the constabulary and the rest of the public. The early release of the Hillsborough files is part of that campaign. This was supposed to turn the majority of the general public against our constables. Then we were meant to blindly accept a brutal, private paramilitary police force as a 'here's one I made earlier' solution.

Was Hillsborough a deliberate psyop? Did the man under the table fake his mental breakdown? How many operatives would be needed to take the few actions that ensured the crush? Was the cover-up strongly sold to all participants? Was Hillsborough deliberate murder designed to be used as a weapon against OUR constables at this time in the attempted enslavement of our people?

reply to post by Kester
With respect, I disagree with your summation that police responsibility for Hillsborough is part of a smear campaign against them,

The recent inquiry has brought to light that 116 out of 164 police statements had been altered to remove any suggestion that they had any responsibility for the incident or deaths. It found that considerable effort had been made to focus the blame on Liverpool FC supporters. The findings have not been challenged in any significant way by any police force including South Yorkshire police.

It was found that lives were lost due to a failure to initiate any reasonable disaster plan.

This was compounded by years of silence and evasion that actually led many in Britain to accuse Liverpool supporters of being wholly responsible.

You can read the report here if you want a better understanding.

You can read point for point how S Yorkshire Police and the media (specifically The Sun) lied in this article.

What happens now?

The IPCC will spend several months determining the size and scope of what will be the biggest investigation into the police in British history. The home secretary, Theresa May, has promised to provide the necessary manpower and resources. It will ultimately decide whether criminal charges should be referred to the Crown Prosecution Service or make recommendations for disciplinary charges. It acknowledges, however, that its powers are limited where actions fall short of criminal charges and the individuals concerned have retired.

The Director of Public Prosecutions will review the evidence with a view to bringing manslaughter charges against organisations - which could include South Yorkshire police, Sheffield Wednesday Football Club and Sheffield City Council - or individuals. The attorney general, Dominic Grieve, must also decide whether to apply to the high court to quash the existing 96 verdicts of accidental death. He will liaise with the familiies and the CPS over when to hold any new inquest.

Link

I am a Liverpool supporter and I'm not a person that has an axe to grind with the police in general. Nevertheless, what the police did in this case is beyond a disgrace. This is one of the biggest disasters in living memory and the victims were lied about and presented as something less than human. The course of justice was perverted by those who were charged with upholding it.

So with respect, you're talking nonsense and adding more defamation to those who died and those who have fought for years to bring this out. Read the links. Go away and think about it. Then, if possible, wait and see what happens next. I'm not angry about your baseless allegations because I've heard worse.

reply to post by Kandinsky


Do you know if it's true that the files were released earlier than legally required? Very unusual for a cover-up to be ditched so easily. The timing of the release is part of the media campaign. The actions taken or not taken have to be answered for. We are all as individuals responsible for our actions. It seems likely a very small number of operatives could have taken the actions that caused the crush, particularly given the previous occasions on which a crush almost occurred. Could these previous events have been practice runs? Is there any evidence that says this was definitely not a deliberate act?

Faked or not the alleged mental breakdown has to be investigated. Have you heard tell of this breakdown before?

Other very dubious tricks were played during that era. Some I have close secondhand knowledge of such as the lies told to police at the roadblock before the 'Battle of the Beanfield'. Police were told two of their colleagues had been killed by the lead vehicle. They went crazy smashing up peoples homes and beating pregnant women etc. They were lied to so they'd behave in a way that apparently showed them to be heartless monsters. Many thousands of people have hated them since then. Divide and rule.

Do you see how easy it is with my knowledge to suspect Hillsborough may have been a black operation? It's certainly being used at this precise moment to further undermine the very fragile relationship we have with our constables. The timing is too neat. The banksters and their pet politicians want to create a private police force to protect them from an increasingly well informed public. Destroy the constables, bring in the private police. Allowing the 96 to be used as ammunition against us plebs is the insult. Justice means pinpointing the perpetrators.

The problem with coppers is they like rules. So when they get told to behave in a certain way by their senior colleagues they tend to obey. I expect they were ordered to take part in the cover-up and the pansies didn't have the guts to tell 'sir' to go and jump. The cover-up has to be torn apart and that is a lesson to all serving police. If you allow yourself to be bullied into taking part in a cover-up it will come back and ruin your life.

What I'm asking is is there any evidence that clearly indicates this was a tragic case of negligence/incompetence and could not have been a deliberate black operation?

reply to post by Kester

What I'm asking is is there any evidence that clearly indicates this was a tragic case of negligence/incompetence and could not have been a deliberate black operation?

Read the report (pdf) and draw your own conclusions.

IMO it was negligence and incompetence that developed into a cover-up.

reply to post by Kandinsky


This statement stands out instantly. "The risks were known and the crush in 1989 was foreseeable." If that statement is true negligence and incompetence are very mild words to describe how this came about. Reckless greed and the wilful endangerment of lives might be more appropriate if lost revenue while carrying out alterations was the motive for leaving things as they were.

On page 28 of the report we see this
"1.18 In 2009, following a public announcement by Andy Burnham, Secretary of State for
Culture, Media and Sport, concerning the possible early release of Hillsborough-related
documents, the Hillsborough Family Support Group met with the Home Secretary. As a
consequence the Hillsborough Independent Panel was appointed in January 2010."

Was the early release of Hillsborough related documents timed to coincide with the planned destruction of the office of constable and their replacement with a private police force serving only the banksters and their criminal cohorts? Hillsborough is certainly being used with perfect timing as an emotive weapon against police.

"....following the 1981 incident, there was
a breakdown in the relationship between SWFC and SYP. SWFC refused to accept
the seriousness of the incident and held SYP responsible for the mismanagement
of the crowd. SYP considered that the maximum capacity for the Leppings Lane
terrace, set at 10,100, was too high, a view strongly contested by SWFC."
Do SWFC stand by this today?

The breakdown in communication between the football club and the police was due to police wanting fans to stay alive and the club wanting fans money. This is something all fans need to think about. The people who make money out of your attendance will ignore safety issues to maximise profits. "Strongly contested". The club put effort into ignoring police safety warnings.

Please forgive me for telling a hitch-hiking story. Occasionally someone with a secret will pick up a hitchhiker so they can safely tell their secret to a stranger. In the early eighties I was hitching out of Perth, Scotland. A man stopped and offered me a lift up the A9. He asked, "Are you interested in football?" I said no. He looked pleased and started talking about the manager of X football team. He said, "I went to war with that man. I saw him steal a wedding ring from an orphan. He gave him a few coins but it was such a tiny sum compared to the value of the ring it was effectively theft. The boy's parents had been killed. He'd taken the ring from his dead mothers finger and it was the only thing of value he had." I'm not saying all football managers will steal the only thing of value a war orphan has. The man who was manager of a well known Scottish football team in the eighties allegedly did.

The greed of SWFC was enough to ensure conditions existed for a crush. With these conditions existing a deliberate triggering of a crush only needed a few cynical operatives. The man under the table needs to be investigated. Was he there? Was he witnessed having a breakdown? Was his breakdown faked as an essential part of a black operation?

"Recommendations to feed fans directly from designated turnstiles into each pen, thus monitoring precisely the distribution of fans between the pens, were not acted on because of anticipated costs to SWFC." How many times in this report am I going to read SWFC put profit before the safety of the fans?


"Following alterations, the safety of the existing maximum capacity for the Leppings Lane terrace was questioned repeatedly yet the decision was taken by the Club and the safety engineers not to revise the figure."


Page 29
"1.27 Moelwyn Hughes quoted an FA official who ‘feared that the disaster at Bolton might
easily be repeated at 20 or 30 other grounds’. ‘How simple’, the Report concluded, ‘and
how easy it is for a dangerous situation to arise in a crowded enclosure. It happens again
and again without fatal or even injurious consequences’. All that was needed was one or
two additional influences and ‘danger’ could be translated into ‘death and injuries’."

All that was needed was one or two additional influences.....
Do you see how easy it would be to plan and carry out a black operation? How is Hillsborough being used by the duplicitous spook controlled media? That's the giveaway. If all that comes through to the average observer is 'Police are incompetent then they lie about it!' you're not getting the full picture. Studying the report reveals again and again the clubs desire for profit created the conditions that, with "one or two additional influences", led to disaster.

Please excuse my ignorance, but I'm not from the UK, and have only heard about this incedent since I started hanging around ATS. I'm stuck at the office and can't watch the video. Can someone explain to me what this "man under the table" is? Was this a witness or a victim? I take it he had a mental breakdown? Can someone put this into context for me? Thanks in advance!

reply to post by DustbowlDebutante

The senior policeman in charge in the cctv room was under the table a gibbering wreck. The two men in the video had each heard this story independently. One of these men is Tony Farrell, former Principal Intelligence Analyst of South Yorkshire Police. He was told on the 20th anniversary of the disaster by a friend who was a fairly senior policeman at the time. This friend made repeated attempts to enter the cctv room and was possibly going to break the door down when they let him in. The police in the room seemed more intent on hiding the chiefs breakdown than dealing with the disaster. This is the covered up reason for the disjointed police response.

Disclosure means disclosure it doesn't mean another set of lies. This has to be dragged out into the open.

reply to post by Kester


Much obliged for the reply and explanantion.

So all of this (under the table and freaking out) was happening as the disaster was unfolding?

Certainly doesn't sound like an individual who was cut out to be in charge if he can't respond properly during a crisis.

I have seen the photos from this event, but having never been to a sporting event like this, I still have a really hard time wrapping my head around it and understanding how this could happen. The photos and footage are absolutely heart-wrenching.

reply to post by DustbowlDebutante


Yes. The man in charge was allegedly witnessed under the table freaking out as the disaster unfolded. This seems to be the primary cause of the inadequate police response. There is a media campaign underway attempting to destroy the office of constable and replace them with private police. The inadequate police response is being used as an emotive way to manipulate public opinion yet the freakout has yet to be widely acknowledged. Very suspicious.

Unfortunately a crush like this can happen very easily unless the sports ground has been designed and constructed with great care and expense. Most often a disaster is narrowly avoided. On this occasion the 'one or two additional influences' were present. After the event a shameful cover-up was carried out. I'm suspicious of the nature of the cover-up and the way pressure groups may have been manipulated. Given the ease with which the 'one or two additional influences' could be applied I see nothing ruling out the possibility that this was a deliberate black operation.

With all these things it's the timing and the way the event is used to guide public opinion that gives the game away. The exact details are deliberately arranged to be inconclusive. It's the timing and the emotional messages we have to examine.

To be fair to the man in charge he could have been spiked with psychoactive drugs, blackmailed and ordered to fake a breakdown, or a mixture of both.