Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Damp squibs | |
Posted by: | Michael Brown | |
Date/Time: | 20/10/14 17:21:00 |
It’s not fantasy, Richard; it’s observation of the evidence, which has never been properly acknowledged, never mind analysed properly and have the correct questions raised in a court. You accuse me of ‘keep going on’ about Peter Power, but it’s you that keeps going on about him. Peter Power and his crisis management team represent a small part of this case. In fact (and I’ve said this before), I think it’s more likely that Peter Power was also duped hence he couldn’t get his story out to the media quick enough to clear his name. I think, whoever was behind this plot, arranged for everyone to be in the right place, and on the right morning, which included Peter Power and his team; but delayed and cancelled trains mucked it all up. And you do resist from commenting on evidence that doesn’t support the official story, whilst latching on to any snippet of information, which you think supports the authorities’ unfounded claims. You even suggest that the presence of a controlled demolition van alongside a bombed bus should be discounted, and that the reported shootings of men at Canary Wharf should also be discounted and presumed to be a result of confusion. In other words, we should completely ignore significant evidence, and focus on the bits that you like, which seems to be anything that is included in the official story. And you call me a fantasist. |