Page 1 of "Loose Change" - Conspiracy Theories -BBC2 Programme

Hopefully tonight`s conspiracy theories documentary on BBC" will be the death of that inane (money making) "Loose Change" documentary. God, they only see what they want to see, and disregard the rest.
Everything they said was debunked, with proof (as much proof as there can be at such a tragic event).
The only true conspiracy, it seems, that the government have done some cover-ups after the event, like not owning up to the fact they new the terrorists were in the country and an idea that such a tragedy was about to happen.
The government does lie. A stain on a dress, no WMD and Nixon prove that.
But let this 9/11 nonsense die. "Loose Change" only want to make megabucks out of the vulnerable and gullible.
II do think "they" popped off Diana though. "They" have a long, long hisory of doing similar (of which great films have been made too) ;)
The "suicide" of the doctor next week.

This item was edited on Monday, 19th February 2007, 00:38

I was really looking forward to see a genuine BBC documentary on this most vital hot topic
Obviously due to lucrative financial considerations (keeping the Yanks happy) the BBC bottled it at the last minute and instead aired the much publicised US-friendly, second version.

Not for the first time the persuers of truth have already debunked the riduculous hit-piece before it was aired.

Shame on you BBC.

Yes because as *everybody* knows the BBC is notoriously pro-American. Oh yes indeed. :¦



--
www.soundalikes.com :: glitterkat.stumbleupon.com

Quote:
Yes because as *everybody* knows the BBC is notoriously pro-American. Oh yes indeed.

Not pro-American just s*** scared they`ll boycott BBC exports. Or return the favour with 7/7 conspiracy theories. ;)

I just knew if I put "Loose Change" in the heading a quick Google and along "they" would come. Did it deliberately. It worked. :p
One of the writers of the "X Files" summed it all up beautifully. Basically that he would not want to take conspiracy theories away from them as they are frightened people who need "meaning" in something that was so incomprehensible, so terrible, so sad and so "meaningless."
The BBC did well. Again.

This item was edited on Monday, 19th February 2007, 08:09

The only one they did not explain well was the U93 (I think) Why was the hole so small?

Dr 42%er


It`s not easy being different. It`s not easy being cool....but somehow I manage....

The impact and the fuel burst plus the thick insulation of the building. It has been made with impact in mind.. If you push anything rapidly with outer bits, the outer bits will be forced back quite quickly.
Try it at home. ;)

No, you`re thinking of U77. U93 is the `Let`s Roll` plane that I`ve now done two reviews on...

-------------

News Editor and Reviewer
www.dvd.reviewer.co.uk

Go that way, really fast. If something gets in your way, turn...

And those who dance will spin and turn,
And those who wait will wait no more,
And those who talk will hear the words,
And those who see will fade and die,
And those who laugh will surely fall,
And those who know will always feel their backs against the thin wall...

Was on about the one that crashed in to the field. Not the pentagon.

Dr 42%er


It`s not easy being different. It`s not easy being cool....but somehow I manage....

Quote:
I just knew if I put "Loose Change" in the heading a quick Google and along "they" would come.

I haven`t even seen Loose Change. Didn`t need to. Got Loose Change 2 ready for viewing.
May review it here if I get the time.
Regardless of Loose Change, the 911Truth movement had already secured the case for an inside job, and long before Mr Avery (The Producer) came onto the scene. Trouble is you will NEVER see it portrayed on our TV networks. It is too damning.

Quote:
Basically that he would not want to take conspiracy theories away from them as they are frightened people who need "meaning" in something that was so incomprehensible, so terrible, so sad and so "meaningless."

That was just the BBC playing its usual patronising card. Which admittedly they do so well.
You would flourish at the BBC Bastavia. They`ve had two purges of thought-provoking journalists over the last 20 years. And they sure love "diversity". ;)
The BBC usually links 911Truthers to holocaust deniers and terrorists but they know those scallywag tactics are wearing a bit thin now.

The plane that rammed into the Pennsylvanian ground (Flight 93) was not so compacted as the BBC portrayed. The FBI managed to recover ALL of the bodies on the flight manifest and DNA analysis showed no Arab blood in any of them.
Problem for the official storytellers was the miraculously found half-burnt paper passport showing the alleged Arab hijacker`s face. Another cock-up in the official story.
No mention of that by the MI5 controlled BBC.

Another sickening twisting of the facts came from the accusation that Jews were warned in advance of the attack, solely due to an article on an Arab web site that 4000 Jews worked in the WTC.
This was BBC bulls*** at its blinding best.
The actual story was that the Jews who worked in the WTC went public on internet radio broadcasts stating their bosses at the Israeli company Odigo has paged them not to turn up to work that morning. I heard a live interview myself soon after 9/11.

BBC just twists every fact to kill the story dead. It will fool the fools.

This item was edited on Monday, 19th February 2007, 14:16