Loose Change 3 (The Final Cut) ** NOT PART II, NOT A TRAILER – THIS IS THE 3RD AND FINAL INSTALLMENT OF THE LOOSE CHANGE SERIES

www.joiningthedots.tv

“This is the long awaited Loose Change Final Cut DVD. The Final Cut is the last amazing step in the evolution of the Loose Change 9/11 film. It presents over 2 hours of new, undeniable evidence that will leave you speechless. Order it now to guarantee your copy from the first printing. SHIPPING NOVEMBER 19, 2007.”

This is showing in the cinema where I live. We’ve got together with the management and are handing out flyers to try and get as many people to see it as possible.

If you think this is just a ‘conspiracy theory’ I’d at least recommend this film so you can be informed of the inconsistencies within the official account.

Watch it and make up your own mind.

Tim Sparke, the UK Producer of Loose Change 3, has a new independent film website: the link is above. It is the official home of Loose Change 3.

Advertisements

Filed under: Crime, Journalism, Media, Middle East, Military, North America, Psychology, UK, Web, , , , , ,

12 Responses

  1. stephjung says:

    Isn’t it true that the Loose Change series has a questional reputation?

    Their presentation is slick – the continuous, rapid-fire delivery of ‘facts’ cleverly serves to induce doubt in the viewer. A classical, persuasive, propagandist approach to conveying information into an apparantly compelling argument.

    Inconsistancies in any official explanation of any incident large or small are inevitable. It’s likely that many small instances of wrong doing or negligence took place on and around 911. This does not mean that all irregularities and inconsistencies are somehow connected into a large-scale hoax in which the various government agencies are complicit however.

    S Jung PhD

  2. A Free Thinker says:

    By attaching “PhD” to the end of your statement here (aside from being evidently ignorant of the information contained in the film and others beside it) are you not also propagandising your own personal view of events? Comparatively, it would seem, however, without evidence or any sound informational basis for thinking?

    Watch the film, let people make up their own minds; stop using your title to hinder free thought and healthy democratic debate in a time when our most basic freedoms are being stripped from us, nigh on daily, by corporate business and their political hand puppets.

    AFT, BA(Hons) Journalism, Goldsmiths College, University of London.

  3. stephjung says:

    Holy cow! Seems like I touched a raw nerve there! What does my sig have to do with anything?!

    I did watch the film. If you take the time to re-read my post, you’ll see that I merely ask a question and then make a couple of personal observations by way of presenting an alternative opinion. Do you expect me to watch the film, blindly accept all I see presented in it and become hypnotized into bigotry like yourself?

    Are you unable to accept an other’s point of view and opinion without attacking them? I find it amazing that you insist in ‘healthy democratic debate’ and then, in the next breath attempt to denegrate my right to my own opinion.

    You say watch the film – I watched the film already.
    You say let people make up their own minds – where did I deny people the right to make up their own minds. You say stop using your title to hinder free thought and healthy democratic bebate?! – I suggest you consult a health care professional.

    StephJung

  4. Ed says:

    In the interest of maintaining balance here in the comments section:

    120+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials

    270+ Engineers and Architects

    60+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals

    170+ Professors Question 9/11

    200+ 9/11 Survivors and Family Members

    110+ Entertainment and Media Professionals

    100,000’s if not millions of people worldwide.

    The Japanese parliament was recently awash with questions surrounding the issue; an ex-prime minister of Italy has stated it is ‘common knowledge’ among european intelligence agencies that it was an ‘inside job’. There are countless ex-CIA, ex-FBI, and many many people with PhD’s (!) who think there is more to this than Loose Change 3! I think we need to consider that it is just a film. The issues themselves are a reality: to a greater or lesser degree in what direction, I couldn’t say, but do you trust our corporate-sponsored politicians and intelligence communities!?

    I think, personally, it is a little naive to assume innocence of these institutions given their histories!

    Of course, I could be wrong. But if I am then there shouldn’t be anything to hide.

    http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/

  5. stephjung says:

    To make assumptions and reach conclusions based on the ‘evidence’ in that film is naive and simplistic. To encourage people to ‘watch the film and make up their own minds’ is simply insisting that they expose themselves to another form of propaganda. Two wrongs do not make a right.
    What is the motive behind Loose Change? You do not know. If you think it’s ‘the search for truth’ then you are naive.

    Many of the scientists, politicians and professionals who’s testimony you cite are themselves prone to irrational beliefs and fears, as are we all. Despite appearances, their ‘expert’ status does not necessarily elevate them to some higher plain of insight.

    Human evolution and history inexorably lead us up to that tragic moment. It was inevitable. To scurry around now bleating of ‘coverups’ and ‘inside-jobs’ completely misses the point and strenthens within us, the very traits that lead to such attrocities.

    “Of course I could be wrong” – you are wrong. The sad fact of the matter is, you don’t think you are, and you are unable to see the bigger picture. This isn’t about ‘right’ and ‘wrong’. It’s bigger than that.

    Until humanity can see the bigger picture, the core of the problem will remain unaddressed. Until we ourselves accept responsibility for our own thoughts and actions, we are doomed to relive the pattern of fear.

    It saddens me that so much effort is wasted on this pointless witch-hunt. It’s time to learn our lessons, move on and devote our energies to more constructive avenues.

    SJ

  6. whatever says:

    LOL. I’d like to hear you say that in front of all those people! And I’d be especially interested to hear what they’d have to say in reply!

  7. Ed says:

    SJ, I’d so love to believe you. I wholeheartedly understand your skepticism, but I’m afraid to say my own common sense and reason – when applied to the facts and complications that arise here – do not allow me to do so.

    Here’s a transcript of questions recently brought up at the Japanese parliament. I believe you can find it on youtube somewhere, also.

    “We will now start discussing the special anti-terror law. .We now call on Mr. Yukihisa Fujita

    Fujita standing in front of microphone: .

    This will be the last televised broadcast of this committee for so I would like to talk about the origin of the war on terrorism which was the attacks of 911. On September 11 of 2002 I went to a theater house for a charity concert to help build a school in Afghanistan. They chose to have the charity concert on that day as a gesture of respect for the dead. Normally 911 commemorative events are for the people who died in New York but the people who held this event decided that more innocent people died as a result of 911 in Afghanistan than in New York. So they built a grade school near where the statue of Buddha was destroyed in Bamiyan. The name of the school is “the school of hope.” They also lit candles to commemorate the dead both in Afghanistan and in New York in the year 2002, one year after the attacks. So, when discussing these anti-terror laws we should ask ourselves, what was 911, what is terrorism? So today, I would like to talk about the beginning of the war on terror.

    So, I would like to ask the people who call this law an anti-terror law to realize that the biggest victim of the war on terrorism has been Afghanistan so I believe helping the people of Afghanistan should be our biggest priority. I would like to ask Mr. Inuzuka about this.

    Tadashi Inuzuka walking to the microphone:
    As Mr. Fujita says the main purpose of this law is to provide peace and security to Afghanistan. And, as he says, the biggest sufferers have been the people of Afghanistan. Afghanistan has 1.7 times the land area of Japan and 20 some million people live there. Also, because of a drought on the Eurasian continent close to 5 million have died due to water shortages. Even now 1 million people live close to the main battlegrounds. So, the main purpose is to provide stability to those war zones so in that context what should Japan do? However, instead of providing support by providing fuel to the U.S. forces we at the Democratic Party have decided that providing water is more important. The philosophy behind our anti-terror law is to get the ruling party to help deal with this problem.

    Head of the committee: Mr. Fujita

    Mr. Fujita:

    I would like to talk about the origins of this war on terrorism. You may recall that in November I asked you if terrorism was war or if it was a crime. And the whole start of this war on terrorism was 911. What I want to know is if this event was caused by Al Qaeda or not. So far the only thing the government has said is that we think it was caused by Al Qaeda because President Bush told us so. We have not seen any real proof that it was Al Qaeda. I would like to know why the Prime Minister thinks it was the Taliban who was responsible for 911. Committee Chief, I want to ask the Prime Minister because he was chief cabinet officer at the time.

    Prime Minister Fukuda:

    Since the attacks we have communicated with the U.S. government and other governments at different levels and exchanged information. According to secret information obtained by our government and reports put together by foreign governments the 911 attacks were carried out by the international terrorist organization known as Al Qaeda.

    Mr. Fujita:

    So, you are talking about both secret and disclosed information. My question is has the Japanese government carried out its own investigation using the police and other resources? It is a crime so surely an investigation needs to be carried out. When a Japanese journalist was shot in Myanmar you carried out an investigation. In the same way over 20 Japanese people died on 911 so surely the government carried out its own investigation and decided that Al Qaeda was responsible. So, what kind of investigation did you carry out? At the time you were Chief Cabinet Secretary so surely you would know better than anybody so I want to ask you about your investigation.

    Prime Minister Fukuda:

    After the 911 attacks the National Police Agency sent an emergency anti-terror team to New York. They met with U.S. government officials and gathered information about missing Japanese.

    Mr. Fujita:

    So you are saying over 20 people died as a result of a crime and most of those people were working in New York. Also there were some Japanese who died in the four airplanes that were hijacked. I would like to know exactly how many people died in the buildings and how many died in the airplanes. I also want to know how you confirmed this. I would like the Foreign Minister to answer for me.

    Foreign Minister Masahiko Komura standing at right in front of microphone:

    We found the bodies of over a dozen Japanese following the simultaneous terror attacks carried out on September 11 2001. We were also informed about the death of 11 more people by the U.S. authorities. In total 24 Japanese died in those attacks. Of those 2 were in the airplanes.

    Mr. Fujita:

    I would like to ask what flights the two Japanese who died in the airplanes were on and how you determined who they were. If the foreign minister does not know it is OK to get a bureaucrat to answer:

    Foreign Ministry division chief Ryoji Tanizaki:

    Since this a question of fact, I will answer. As the Foreign Minister said, of the 24 people who died two were on the airplanes. One of them was on United Flight 93 and the other was on American airlines flight 11.As for how we know this, well I do not have the information in front of me but we were told by U.S. authorities and, in general, they use DNA testing. So we believe that is how we know about those two people.

    Mr. Fujita:

    So you are saying you do not know because you do not have the documents. Also, you say you believe there was DNA testing but you do not know. So what I want to say today is that this was a crime and crimes are supposed to be investigated. So the government needs to inform the victims families of the results of their investigation. Also, instead of just observing the anniversary of 911 every year you must be gathering information and reacting to it. So, during the past six years have you been supplying the families of the deceased with information? I would like to ask the Foreign Minister to answer.

    Foreign Minister Masahiko Komura:

    So you do not want to ask any more about how we confirmed the deaths of Japanese but want to know about reports to the victims families? We provided the families with information about the bodies and about compensation funds. Also, for the 13 Japanese whose remains we found, we helped the families deal with the bodies. We also financial support visits to the World Trade Center site for the families on every anniversary.

    Mr. Fujita:

    Since I do not have much time I would like to ask about the suspicious information being uncovered and the doubts people world wide are having about the events of 911. Many of these doubters are very influential people. In such circumstances I believe the Japanese government, which claims the attacks were carried out by Al Qaeda, should be providing the victims families with this new information. In that context I would like to ask several questions.

    First of all I would like to get all members of the committee to look at this panel and look at the pictures I have provided you with. This is concrete evidence in the form of photographs and other types of information. The first photograph has computer graphics attached to show how large the plane that hit the Pentagon was. A 757 is quite a large airplane with a width of 38 meters. So as you can see even though such a large plane hit the pentagon there is only a hole that is too small for the airplane. This is a photograph taken of firemen at work and you can also see there is no damage of the sort an airplane that large should make. I would also like you to look at the lawn in front and notice that there are no airplane parts on it. Let us now look at the third picture, which is also of the pentagon taken from a U.S. TV news report has captions that show the roof of the Pentagon is still intact. Again even though a huge airplane is supposed to have hit, there is not enough corresponding damage. Now let us move to the next photograph. Here is a photograph of a hole, as Minister Komura knows the Pentagon is a very strong building with many walls. Yet the airplane has pierced them. But as you know, airplanes are made of the lightest possible material. An airplane made of such light material could not make a hole like that. Next I would like to show a photograph of how the airplane hit the building. The airplane made a U-turn, avoiding the Defense Secretary’s office and hitting the only part of the Pentagon that had been specially reinforced to withstand a bomb attack.

    Also, in the middle of page five we have a comment from a U.S. airforce official. He says I have flown the two types of airplane used on 911 and I cannot believe it would be possible for someone who is flying one for the first time to be able to carry out such a maneuver. Also, as you know, they have not recovered the flight recorders from most of these 4 airplanes. Also, there were more than 80 security cameras at the Pentagon but they have refused to release almost all of the footage. In any case, as you have just seen there is no picture of the airplane or of its wreckage in any of these photographs. It is very strange that no such pictures have been shown to us.

    As you know Japan’s self-defense forces have their headquarters in Ichigaya. Can you imagine if an airplane hit a major city, if an hour and a half after an airplane hit New York that an airplane could hit the Pentagon? In such a situation how could our allies allow such an attack to take place. I would like the Defense Minister to answer this.

    Defense Minister Fuyushiba Ishiba:

    I have not prepared so I will have to answer ad-lib. If such a situation took place then the airforce would send fighters up to shoot down any airplanes. This is what happened with an attack on the German constitutional court. In the case of Japan our reaction would depend on what kind of airplane it was, who was flying it and what their purpose was. However, according to our laws it might be hard to order an airplane to be shot down just because it was flying at a low level. We would probably have self-defense forces fly with it and ask for a cabinet decision. Since an airplane would have many people on board we would have do discuss what to do. This happened a long time ago but a Cesna airplane was flown into the house of a person called Yoshio Kodama. There was also an All Japan Airways flight bound for Hakodate that was hijacked and had the pilot killed. It would be best if such a thing never happened but we need to prepare new laws for such situations and discuss them in Parliament.

    Mr. Fujita:

    Since we are running out of time I would like to present a new piece of evidence. Please look at this panel. The first picture is one you see often of the two towers that were hit by hijacked airplanes. I could understand if this happened right after the airplanes hit but here we can see large piece of material flying a large distance through the air. Some flew 150 meters. You can objects flying in this picture as if there was an explosion. Here is a picture I took from a book. This lets you see how far the objects flew. The third picture is of a fireman who was involved in the rescue talking about a series of explosions in the building that sounded like a professional demolition. We cannot present video today so I have written a translation of what the fireman said. Here his is saying “it went boom boom boom like explosions were going off.”

    Here is something said by a Japanese research team of officials from the fire department and the construction ministry. The interviewed a Japanese survivor who said that while she was fleeing there were explosions. This testimony appears in a report prepared with the aid of the construction ministry and the fire department. Now I would like you to see the following picture. Normally it is said that the twin towers collapsed because they were hit by airplanes. However, one block away from the twin towers is building number 7. It can be seen in the following map a block away from the WTC. This building collapsed 7 hours after the WTC buildings were attacked. If I could show you a video it would be easy to understand but take a look at this photograph. This is a 47 story building that fell in this manner (He drops and object to demonstrate). The building falls in five or six seconds. It is about the same speed as an object would fall in a vacuum. This building falls like something you would see in a Kabuki show. Also if falls while keeping its shape. Remember it was not hit by an airplane. You have to ask yourself if a building could fall in that manner due to a fire after 7 hours. Here we have a copy of the 911 commission report. This is a report put out by the U.S. government in July of 2004 but this report does not mention the collapse of the building I just described. It is not mentioned at all in here (he waves the book). FEMA also issued a report but they also fail to mention this building. Many people believe, especially after seeing the story about building number 7, that something is strange. Since this is an incident where many people died people think is should be investigated.

    We are running out of time but I would also like to mention the put options. Just before the 911 attacks, ie on September 6th, 7th and 8th there were put options put out on the stocks of the two airlines United and American that were hit by hijackers. There were also put options on Merril Lynch, one of the biggest WTC tenants. In other words somebody had insider information and made a fortune selling put options of these stocks. The head of Germany’s Bundesbank at the time, who is equivalent to the Governor of the Bank of Japan, said there are lots of facts to prove the people involved in the terror attacks profited from insider information. He said there was lots of suspicious trading involving financial companies etc prior to the attacks. The had of the Bundesbank was willing to say this much. I would like to ask the Finance Minster about these put options. Did the government of Japan know about this, and what do you think about this? I would like to ask Finance Minister Nukaga about this.

    Finance Minister Fukushiro Nukaga:

    I was in Burkina Fasso in Africa when I heard about this incident. I decided to fly immediately to the U.S. but when I got to Paris I was told there were no flights to America. So I only heard what was reported later about the facts. I know there have been reports about the points you raise. So we made it obligatory that people provide ID for securities transactions and for suspicious transactions to be reported and we made it a crime to provide money to terrorist organizations. We believe the international financial system should not be abused. In any case, terrorism is a horrible thing and must be condemned. This type of terrorism cannot be stopped by one country but needs to be stopped by international society.

    Mr. Fujita:

    I would like to ask finance specialist Mr. Asao to tell me about put options. A group of people with large amounts of money, clear insider information and financial expertise would have been necessary for such a thing to take place. Could a few terrorists in Afghanistand and Pakistan carry out such a sophisticated and large scale set of transactions? I would like to ask Mr. Asao to respond.

    Keiichiro Asao:

    I understand put options are a deal to sell stocks at a fixed price. In this case somebody must have had insider information to carry out such transactions because nobody could normally predict these airlines would have their planes hijacked. So, I believe this was certainly a case of insider trading.

    Mr. Fujita:

    Prime Minister, you were Chief Cabinet Secretary at the time and as somebody has already noted, this was an incident of the sort that humanity had never previously experienced. Also, there appears to be a lot more information about this incident coming out now than came out in the months after the attacks. Now that we are an internet and visual society, this information is being made public so if we look at the situation now, the whole starting point for these two laws , the start of the war on terror itself, as you have seen from the information I have presented, has not been properly investigated or analyzed. So I do not believe the government has acted properly by investigating this incident or asking the U.S. government for an explanation. So far we have not started refueling U.S. ships yet so I think we need to go back to the beginning and not just simply and blindly trust the U.S. government explanation and indirect information provided by them. There were too many victims so I think we need to start again from the beginning. We need to ask who the real victims of this war on terrorism are. I think the citizens of the world are its victims. Here in Japan we have disappearing pensions and disappearing records about victims of Hepatitis C contaminated blood but everything I have presented on facts and confirmable evidence. Let us talk about the vanishing black boxes, vanishing airplanes and vanishing remains. Also lots of the remains of these buildings have disappeared. Even FEMA says that prevented it from carrying out a proper investigation. We need to look at this evidence and ask ourselves what the war on terrorism really is. I can see the ministers nodding in agreement but I would like to ask Prime Minister Fukuda. Please look at me. I have heard that when you were Chief Cabinet Minister at the time you felt many strange things about these attacks. Do you not think it was strange?

    Prime Minister Fukuda:

    I never said I thought it was strange.

    Mr. Fujita:

    Prime Minister what about the origin of the war on terror and the idea of whether it is right or wrong to participate in it? Is there really a reason to participate in this war on terror? Do we really need to participate? I would also like to ask about how to really stop terrorism.

    Prime Minister Fukuda:

    We believe based on evidence provided to us by the U.S. government that the attacks of 911 were carried out by Al Qaeda. We need to put an end to Al Qaeda terrorism. That is why international society is united in the fight against terrorism. Here, concerning a law passed by the Democratic Party last year and based on UN resolution 16595. This is a resolution passed in response to the terrorist attacks on the U.S. So you passed the law agreeing with the UN didn’t you?

    Mr Fujita:

    Did you confirm about the bodies and the facts behind the resolution because that is why you claim to be participating in this war on terrorism. So I believe to end terrorism we need to pass a law that actually helps the people of Afghanistan. I would like Mr. Inuzuka to talk about the law and about the fight against terrorism.

    Tadashi Inuzuka:

    Among the many problems raised by MP Fujita the thing we need to worry most about is that the people in Afghanistan can live in peace and without worries. That is the core of the issue of ending terrorism. Without discussing this but just operating behind the back lines by supplying oil and not thinking about the entire situation or the people involved it is nonsense to debate this law. This law should be made for peace and security in Afghanistan. Our country needs to pass a real anti-terror law.”

    Anybody else got any comment?

  8. stephjung says:

    “SJ, I’d so love to believe you. I wholeheartedly understand your skepticism”.

    No, unfortunately, you don’t understand my skepticism. Not even close. You missed the point entirely.

    You are only capable of processing information that supports your agenda. That is a dangerous place to be. You do not even realize that you made up your mind a long time ago and are simply seeking evidence to back up your opinion.

    Any data that points to the contrary are dismissed out of hand. Any suggestion that rational explanations are possible is dismissed out of hand. People that make such suggestions you deride as naive.

    Saying that you understand and actually understanding are very different. I’d like to see the guy “Free Thinker?” who’s so proud of his journalism degree to do some real investigative journalism – investigate why people are so keen to believe conspiracy theories.

    Have any of you yourselves actually corroborated the ‘facts’ shown in the loose change series? Have any of you actually obtained copies of the documents cited and cross-referenced them? Have any of you actually read the 911 commission report? Or are you simply regurgitating internet tittle tattle?

    If you believe that there is a coordinated coverup of some kind, has it even occured to you that the ‘911 quest for truth’ approach is alienating as many people as it’s convincing. It’s also galvanizing the rift between those in power and the people railing against them.

    An aggressive stance against those you’re hoping to impeach – is that your intention? will simply force them to dig into their trenches and prepare for battle.

    The ammunition from the loose change series is circumstantial at best. Guess what, it would not stand up in a court of impeachment.

  9. Ed says:

    “You are only capable of processing information that supports your agenda.”

    Hmmm, not sure since when wanting to know the truth was an ‘agenda’.

    It also appears to me that the very same accusation could be leveled at yourself.

    As regards ‘Free Thinker’ and his BA, I believe he was trying to be ironic (and yet peculiarly relevant at the same time – which I think you missed). AFT being my ‘away-shirt’ from a cyber cafe in town, I’m quite certain that’s what was intended but not being overly articulate at the best of times, I guess it didn’t come across that way. Can we put our degrees back into the sock drawer for now? I know people without a shred of education that have minds as quick as snakes and they’d get SO bored of this conversation were we to take it any further down the path it’s currently on.

    Shall we ignore the questions raised by Mr. Fujita in the Japanese Parliament, also? What about those exact same concerns of Robert Fisk, middle-eastern correspondant of the UK Independent Newspaper? Those of Peter Tatchell, recently published in The Guardian? Among countless others (General Wesley Kanne Clarke, Commander Konstad, Robert Baer, etc.etc.etc.etc.)

    I’m done with this conversation. It’s going nowhere. Plus, I’m really not into unsound rhetoric or passive-aggressive slanging matches. You can do that on digg.com, but I’d rather not here. Please make your next comment, if any, a prudent/intelligent one or I’ll probably just remove this entire conversation. This kind of ‘debate’ leaves a nasty taste in my mouth. It’s like a game of chess with dodgy house rules.

    Sorry. And I reiterate: I do understand your skepticism. Wholeheartedly. There are days when I simply cannot believe any of it myself. But I’d thank you to recognise that how I feel is down to me, and to choose to express it, and not for you to coerce in some indirect fashion to serve your own – apparently obstinate – ‘agenda’.

    Just to try and end this on a musical and educational note, look up ‘operation gladio’ on this site. There’s a BBC2 documentary about it that I think you may find interesting.

    Peace. Please?! 🙂

  10. Ed says:

    One last thing. Look up Bill Doyle, because I get your point about me and the documents and the cross referencing etc.etc. I’ve done as much as I can. Bill Doyle has done this. He legally represents about 7000 911 victim’s family members in the now infamous Saudi-suit. See what he has to say. It’s very interesting. He lost his son in one of the towers who was, I believe, a director for Merrill Lynch. I can’t recall if his occupational background is law, but it’s certainly his experiential background of late: and he has some interesting things to say about 911 charity funds, too. Stuff you wouldn’t want to believe. I didn’t. Still don’t. But, eventually, you just have to.

    I’m not a loose-change-changed-my-world‘er. In fact, I never rated it, really, compared to other films/sources of information. This one is comparatively water-tight to it’s predeccessors, however. But it’s just a film at the end of the day. This is a website about radical films. The issue about 911 is considerably larger than this film or this site or the parameters of this discussion/argument.

  11. stephjung says:

    The idealistic term ‘search for truth’ is merely a rhetorical trick that allows people to hijack the debate to suit their own agendas.

    I believe that many of the ‘truth seekers’ are merely using the debate to exercise their anti-Bush administration, and other, varied political agendas.

    Many other ‘truth seekers’ are seeking closure after the loss of family members. They feel the need to blame someone for the tradgedy.

    Many other ‘truth seekers’ are cynical opportunists making money or a name for themselves from their 911 conspiracy theory books.

    Many other ‘truth seekers’ are activists who enjoy being against something.

    Many other ‘truth seekers’ are merely gullible people with too much spare time on their hands, swept along with the whole circus, they make a lot of noise but, if they’re entirely honest with themselves, don’t really care.

    Which are you?

    Question everything.
    Including your own motives.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

RSS Radical feed

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

About me

I'm a Media and Communications graduate from Goldsmiths College, London, a Project Manager and Web Developer (C#, PHP). In my spare time I like to write fiction, music, and read current affairs.

Editor’s Favourites

%d bloggers like this: