another person from the BBC documentary has set up a group called the Love Police and is clamouring another 5 minutes of fame joining every other cause known to man or beast
You're a bit back to front there. Charlie Veitch set up the Love Police 2 years prior to 9/11 Roadtrip, and was asked to appear
because he was a known face in the 9/11 conspiracy community.
To his credit though, he did look at the evidence presented to him, and did change his mind.
However, because of this, the 9/11 conspiracy community have completely turned on him, branded him a "traitor", a sell out, made claims that he was a BBC/CIA inside agent all along, and all manner of stuff.
Anyway, here's my views on the bits mentioned.
1969 Moon Landing
Now, you can seperate this into "man didn't land on The Moon in 1969" and "man didn't land on The Moon at all".
The Space Race was exactly that. America and Russia both desperate to get their flag into the lunar surface.
There was supposedly an attempt to fake moonwalking footage by the Russians, let down by bubbles coming out of the back of the cosmonaught's helmet.
NASA has footage showing Neil Armstrong failing miserably to control the prototype lander flying system, having to eject and let the lander crash.
The President had promised the people that an American man would walk on The Moon by the end of the decade, and by golly, they managed it. Just. If they couldn't have done it, would they have faked it, just to make sure? And if they would have, did they?
Very unlikely.
However, the conspiracy theory has flourished, mainly because NASA are dicks. There are photo's with anomolies in them, and rather than release a statement saying "These are retouched or composite photo's, designed for publicity purposes rather than scientific study", they just deny things that are clearly there.
Likewise, there is some infamous video footage, supposedly taken in two different locations, and on two different days. The location is clearly identical. The camera is on a tripod, and put side by side (or even overlaid, as some documentaries have done), the background and foreground lining up exactly proves that it is the same place.
Instead of NASA saying "Perhaps the videos have been incorrectly filed, and they are in fact the same place", they spent years claiming it was nonsense was positively, definately two different places. This is what fueled a lot of the "shot in a studio" theories.
I believe they have in recent years admitted that it was a case of someone putting the wrong tape in the wrong box.
For "did man go there at all", the main argument revolves around the Russians suddenly deciding that they didn't want to go there after all, after the discovery of the Van Allen radiation belt.
Gagarin, Glenn and co weren't far enough into space to be affected by this, but to reach the moon, astronaughts would have to pass through it, and would not survive.
Did the UK Government kill Diana, Princess of Wales?
No. Why would they need to? To stop Dodi al Fayed becoming the first muslim king? In what reality was Fayed even slightly in line to the throne?
Diana wasn't going to become Queen. She gave that up with her indiscreet antics with Will Carling, James Hewitt, and the squidgy fellow.
Diana was no patron to road safety. One (somewhat insensitive) news organisation listed all the road accidents she'd been involved in just after she died. It was an insurance companies wet dream, with 5 in her final two years. More likely is that she knew a dramatic car chase through the Parisian streets would ensure her publicity, rather than sit back, read the paper, and give the paparazzi nothing worth publishing.
Having said that, I do wish the theory about the sniper disguised as a Duluxe dog was real.
