7/7 conspiraloon article in today's G2 magazine

[zArk]

indeed, if i was a conspiraloon myself, I'd be willing to make an argument that people that bang on about The Owl ceremonies, 9-11 etc are actually state sponsored agents of confusion, false-false-flag operative, put it into the field to challenge official accounts with theories so ludicruous that everyone decided to believe the official version because it's infinitely more logical and preferable.

oh you liked my pantomime stuff then.

So fuck off

charmer

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

I have given an example of how this happens and you become rude and abusive.

So you must have missed it when i wrote in post 45 above that

And I'm sure that there are a lot of simple answers for some of the crack headed shite that keeps coming up in connection with these incidents. I would respecfully make a request that idle or cranky speculation desists in the run-up to the first anniversary, as many people find it disingenuous, manipulative and upsetting.

Rude and abusive son, i ain't started if you carry on with this. And you can take that however you like. I was caught in the aftermath of this shit, i know others who were as well, and it is quite frankly insulting the way this has become a virtual industry for some people.

 

[zArk]

Its. been. cropped.

duh!

yup, its a bit annoying and the next question would be 'for what reason?'. What possible reason could there be to crop such an important picture?

yes, its an endless stream of questions and answers. Which is exactly what happens with every other conceivable issue BUT when one questions official stories, the authorities shut up shop and act all superior to everyone else. Then the questions get out of hand, speculation of facts turns into the odd individual dreamland [9/11 holographics images] and then 'conspiraloons' are to blame. Oh right, its nothing to do with the fact that there are inconsistencies in the official story.

 

[editor]

yup, its a bit annoying and the next question would be 'for what reason?'. What possible reason could there be to crop such an important picture?

FFS: I could think up several credible reasons, starting with the painfully obvious: "to remove the identities of those people not yet identified by police."

Sadly, such straightforward logic seems tragically absent in your "I really, really want to believe" looncrackers-tastic mind.

 

[zArk]

Rude and abusive son, i ain't started if you carry on with this. And you can take that however you like. I was caught in the aftermath of this shit, i know others who were as well, and it is quite frankly insulting the way this has become a virtual industry for some people.

Look Paulie, I will discuss anything and in anyway I wish.

thanks

 

[zArk]

FFS: I could think up several credible reasons, starting with the painfully obvious: "to remove the identities of those people not yet identified by police."

ermm pixelation of faces could do that, no need to remove the timestamp. Plus there is no mention of the time it was taken, not one.

http://www.met.police.uk/news/terrorist_attacks/response5.htm

you really are reaching with that one editor.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

yup, its a bit annoying and the next question would be 'for what reason?'. What possible reason could there be to crop such an important picture?

yes, its an endless stream of questions and answers. Which is exactly what happens with every other conceivable issue BUT when one questions official stories, the authorities shut up shop and act all superior to everyone else. Then the questions get out of hand, speculation of facts turns into the odd individual dreamland [9/11 holographics images] and then 'conspiraloons' are to blame. Oh right, its nothing to do with the fact that there are inconsistencies in the official story.

you crop an image to balance it;
to make it more suitble for useage;
to kill off empty space;
to make it fit the area you are placing it...

nothing at all conspiritorial about it ... it's simply standard proceedure when publishing images to make them fit...

in this case i'd have thought if anything it was probably more likely to have been cropped to highlight the bombers walking into the station and draw your attention there again nothing shady about this it's called composing the subject...

E2A

in releation to the endless string of questions; a child saying why after every sentence is not doing it for the knowledge they gain...

 

[zArk]

you crop an image to balance it;
to make it more suitble for useage;
to kill off empty space;
to make it fit the area you are placing it...

nothing at all conspiritorial about it ... it's simply standard proceedure when publishing images to make them fit...

the picture on the police website is cropped without timestamp or reference to time taken.

in releation to the endless string of questions; a child saying why after every sentence is not doing it for the knowledge they gain...

i dont hear any conspiraloons asking "why did he go into Boots?" or "why did they stop at maccadeees?"

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

ermm pixelation of faces could do that, no need to remove the timestamp. Plus there is no mention of the time it was taken, not one.

http://www.met.police.uk/news/terrorist_attacks/response5.htm

you really are reaching with that one editor.

talk about clutching at staws here that has clearly been cropped to show the identiy of the specific bomber in situ in order to hopefully spur on peoples memories of the incident.... ffs have you been to luton have you any idea how many asians live there have you any idea how difficult it would be to get the same person on camera at the same time period and wearing the same clothes and carryign the same back pack...

 

[editor]

ermm pixelation of faces could do that, no need to remove the timestamp.

Why the fuck should they waste time pixellating people's faces and removing other identifying elements when they can just present a crop?

No., don't bother answering it. I've had enough of dealing with fruitloops who spend their entire time shifting the debate from one minor and non-existent claimed 'anomaly' to another without ever, ever presenting any credible proof to back up their barking suggestions.

If there was a timestamp in the image, you'd say it had been tampered with. If there's not one there you'd claim it's been removed as part of a cover up.

It's like arguing with a religious fucknut.

Enough already. Thread closed. If any new threads crop up repeating the exact same fact-free fantasies with no supporting evidence, they'll be closed/binned too.