The most intriguing conspiracy theory

^^^

A number of the hi-jackers turned up alive and well after the event, and gave interviews in newspapers and on TV in their respective countries. I suspect this was down to an error of judgement on the part of the authorities. It's important for some people, and for reasons of closure, that faces are put to crimes. I think these spods were on the radar of the intelligence services, but their whereabouts were unknown, so they were just pulled out of hat for the media identity parade.

Have you seen 'Ripple effect' about 7/7? I suspect you have. The name Peter Powers, will no doubt mean something to you, if you follow such things. I;d like t know more about the drill he was running that day, although it should be said, he worked in the private sector, and his client was a publishing company, and not related to any government dept.

Re; Alex Jones. I watch him on Youtube a lot. I find his show fascinating, and compelling, although I find myself often cringing at the way he deals with some topics. Some of his expose's of the Fed, and corporate corruption have been right on target. It's when he starts going on about illuminati bloodlines he loses me. I also don't like the fact he has David Icke on his show from time to time, especially after admitting he was a complete fraud and a charlatan, in a documentary about Icke. But he does have top economists on his show. The likes of Peter Schiff and Gerald Celente who accurately predicted this mess we're in now, ten years ago!

EDIT: THIS POST WAS MEANT FOR JAMES.

Edited by Blacksword - November 20 2011 at 13:04

I've not read much about 7/7 yet.  I do know there was a drill that morning though (as was also the case with 9/11 and Utoya by the way).  I shall watch the video at some point.

I've read a bit about analysis of the Tavistock Square Bus photos though.  There could be discrepancies there but I'm by no means an expect on photography and angles and anomalies.

The other issue I think relates to the emergency services taking so long.

manofmystery: although it won't interest you in the slightest, I just want to say that there has been several different versions of Loose Change over the years and you may have seen one of the older ones.  The newer ones cover different ground, or often cover things in more detail.

I just thought I'd mention that.

James wrote: Are we referring to the impact markers in the Pentagon or in the towers?  The impact markers in the towers aren't as questionable.  It's the Pentagon one I'm referring to.

Me too. There's not much strange about them.

James wrote: Blacksword wrote: James wrote: I've not read much about 7/7 yet.  I do know there was a drill that morning though (as was also the case with 9/11 and Utoya by the way).  I shall watch the video at some point.I've read a bit about analysis of the Tavistock Square Bus photos though.  There could be discrepancies there but I'm by no means an expect on photography and angles and anomalies.The other issue I think relates to the emergency services taking so long. I couldn't resist. You'll like this James.. This is Peter Powers of Visor Consultants, stating clearly on a BBC 5 Live interview, that he was running an anti terror drill on the morning of 7/7 which had exactly the same scenario as the attacks... Peter Powers 7/7 I'm actually watching Ripple Effect at the moment.  I just paused it quickly to type something I'd remembered from my random trawling of the Internet.I remember now that there was a conference in Gleneagles on 7/7 and that a photographer/journalist who was at 7/7 was also later in London taking photos.How would he get there so quick?Actually, it may be the other way around and he was in London first and later in Gleneagles but the same point is true.  It seems remarkable he'd be in two different ends of the country within a short time taking photos of both events.

It was the G8 if I remember rightly.

Yeah, that is a bit odd. I'm sure they weren't short of photographers at the G8. I can't imagine why they would ferry the same one photographer between the two events, when the national media was all over both like a plague of locusts. I can't even see what the conspiracy would be to be honest. Sounds like bollocks, again.

You can tell he's dead as he's not wearing any shoes and socks.  Its a sign!

James wrote: I don't read Cracked articles because they're mostly stupid.  I may take a look at it though.I'm not grasping for anything.  I said in an earlier post that I thought something suspicious was going on the day it happened.  This was whilst watching the endless News coverage.  The 'planes didn't seem real to me.  I didn't really think about it much back then but I did later on and then I sated my curiosity online by looking to see if others had doubts and they did.So I didn't get sucked in by anyone else.

Sorry, I've not read the entire thread. Which planes didn't look real? The planes that hit the towers??

manofmystery wrote: James wrote: manofmystery: although it won't interest you in the slightest, I just want to say that there has been several different versions of Loose Change over the years and you may have seen one of the older ones.  The newer ones cover different ground, or often cover things in more detail.I just thought I'd mention that.     They all stem from the same fictional script.  If you'd have looked at the Cracked article with your "open" (yet seemingly empty) mind then you'd be aware of the motives.  Grasping for strings of evidence to support a story that was fictional to begin with is pathetic but not as pathetic as people buying it.  You remind me of Karl Pilkington, James.  I can see you and him out there looking for the chimp doctor he read about.   And I know, James: what a crank I must be for supporting the 1 candidate that gives a damn about the US Constitution.  That invalidates everything I say.  I mean, what sane person would want a President that wants to abide by the law of the land instead of ignoring it?  Limited government and peace are just ridiculous desires.

Excuse my ignorance. Is there actually an up and running Libertarian party in the US? If so, why doesn't Ron Paul ditch the Reps and go with them. From what I can see the reps are fielding clowns as candidates. Is the world supposed to take Cain, Bachman, Perry and Romney seriously?

I'm not convinced about Ron Pauls views on health care and abortion, but beyond that he seems to be the only candidate with any intellectual merit and integrity. I certainly never thought I'd see that in the republican party.

I see. I've not seen that footage, but all the footage I've seen looked real enough.

Impossible to comment on the issue of radio control.

manofmystery wrote: James wrote: manofmystery: although it won't interest you in the slightest, I just want to say that there has been several different versions of Loose Change over the years and you may have seen one of the older ones.  The newer ones cover different ground, or often cover things in more detail. I just thought I'd mention that.     They all stem from the same fictional script.  If you'd have looked at the Cracked article with your "open" (yet seemingly empty) mind then you'd be aware of the motives.  Grasping for strings of evidence to support a story that was fictional to begin with is pathetic but not as pathetic as people buying it.  You remind me of Karl Pilkington, James.  I can see you and him out there looking for the chimp doctor he read about.   And I know, James: what a crank I must be for supporting the 1 candidate that gives a damn about the US Constitution.  That invalidates everything I say.  I mean, what sane person would want a President that wants to abide by the law of the land instead of ignoring it?  Limited government and peace are just ridiculous desires.

I have no idea who Karl Pilkington is.

There's motives in anything.  I'm sure there were motives with the making of Loose Change.  It's still a source to look into though and even if a lot it is fictional, you don't just come up with this stuff without some evidence.  He has some valid points.

You need holes in the first place to be able to come up with a conspiracy.  You don't just invent them to suit your means.