jlew can roll his eyes at PNAC all he wants but Cheney and company sure made sure their policies got enacted
do you know that this almighty powerful organization doesnt even exist anymore? and at best had a one room office in Washington. please research the PNAC. you clearly know little about it besides thinking they somehow hatched a plan to attack and kill Americans.
they also had members like cheney, rumsfeld, wolfowitz, scooter libby........they got what they wanted, didn't they?
we invaded iraq
we broke the nuclear nonproliferation treaty
we increased defense spending
we militarized space.....
who cares if PNAC still exists now? i said Bush was a puppet for their agendas. everyone knows Bush didn't know much of what was going on during his 8 years
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
jlew can roll his eyes at PNAC all he wants but Cheney and company sure made sure their policies got enacted
do you know that this almighty powerful organization doesnt even exist anymore? and at best had a one room office in Washington. please research the PNAC. you clearly know little about it besides thinking they somehow hatched a plan to attack and kill Americans.
they also had members like cheney, rumsfeld, wolfowitz, scooter libby........they got what they wanted, didn't they?
we invaded iraq
we broke the nuclear nonproliferation treaty
we increased defense spending
we militarized space.....
so based on their obvious agenda, that has been common knowledge since the late 80s, they planned and executed 9/11? or at the least sat back and all agreed to let our country get attacked? is that really what you believe?
who cares if PNAC still exists now? i said Bush was a puppet for their agendas. everyone knows Bush didn't know much of what was going on during his 8 years
yes he did. he made the final decision. thats what Presidents do. Cheney has recently been quoted saying he was upset with Bush becasuse he didn't always follow his advising.
you have a closed mind, try to think a little on your own and not believe everything you read at face value.
Be careful. Some will say that is nothing more than an oversized pic of the St. Louis 98 PJ concert. Same colors and it involves a plane. Shhhhhhhhhhhh
do you know that this almighty powerful organization doesnt even exist anymore? and at best had a one room office in Washington. please research the PNAC. you clearly know little about it besides thinking they somehow hatched a plan to attack and kill Americans.
they also had members like cheney, rumsfeld, wolfowitz, scooter libby........they got what they wanted, didn't they?
we invaded iraq
we broke the nuclear nonproliferation treaty
we increased defense spending
we militarized space.....
so based on their obvious agenda, that has been common knowledge since the late 80s, they planned and executed 9/11? or at the least sat back and all agreed to let our country get attacked? is that really what you believe?
who cares if PNAC still exists now? i said Bush was a puppet for their agendas. everyone knows Bush didn't know much of what was going on during his 8 years
yes he did. he made the final decision. thats what Presidents do. Cheney has recently been quoted saying he was upset with Bush becasuse he didn't always follow his advising.
you have a closed mind, try to think a little on your own and not believe everything you read at face value.
sigh i already stated twice in this thread that i didn't know what happened.
you are the 1 who asks a question then have it answered only to ask a million more....you stated we never conceived of airplanes being used to attack us....i gave you a link to a usa today article talking about NORAD running drills in 1999 of hijacked airplanes being crashed into the wtc and pentagon and other buildings and you don't address it, you just asked more questions.
Bush was a puppet for PNAC plain and simple. it doesn't matter that they are no longer around, members of PNAC were all through the white house from VP to sec of Defense to advisors, Cheney's cheif of staff....Bush was the face. He even admitted he doesn't read or look into things very much, he relies on what his advisers and those around him tell him. in other words, he does as he's told.
i remember in 04 he had a town hall type meeting and a girl asked him about making cuts to the student loan program and other programs just a day or 2 before this meeting. Bush had no fucking clue what she was talking about! he even asked her if she was sure! he's an idiot period. he didn't always do everything Cheney said but he did enough. Read PNAC's paper from 2000 and tell me most of that agenda didn't get enacted during Bush's first term.
like i said, i don't know what happened but people should be allowed to ask questions without all the hostility and attacks. a lot doesn't add up.
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
I wonder if those responsible for uncovering the Iran-Contra scandal were also conspiracy theorists?
yeah, until it was proven and then most people just shrugged and could care less....
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
sigh i already stated twice in this thread that i didn't know what happened.
you are the 1 who asks a question then have it answered only to ask a million more....you stated we never conceived of airplanes being used to attack us....i gave you a link to a usa today article talking about NORAD running drills in 1999 of hijacked airplanes being crashed into the wtc and pentagon and other buildings and you don't address it, you just asked more questions.
what would you like me to address? we ran drills, so what? the drills obviously failed as we were not prepared that day. you say what exactly? that it was allowed to happen?
it doesn't matter that they are no longer around, members of PNAC were all through the white house from VP to sec of Defense to advisors, Cheney's cheif of staff....Bush was the face. He even admitted he doesn't read or look into things very much, he relies on what his advisers and those around him tell him. in other words, he does as he's told.
what the fuck are you getting at? that the PNAC, included Bush, allowed 9/11 to happen?
like i said, i don't know what happened but people should be allowed to ask questions without all the hostility and attacks. a lot doesn't add up.
asking questions is one thing and accusing the PNAC and Bush of allowing the 9/11 attacks to happen is another.
there were many people in power who wanted to go to war with Iraq and keep America as a super power. I ask...SO WHAT. what does this prove? fact is, 9/11 was an attack on our country by Muslim extremists. Bush, Cheney, PNAC had nothing to do with it
Muslim extremists attacked America. Therefore, Iraq was a legitimate target.
That's like saying that because some terrorists blew up a bar in Bali a few years ago and killed a bunch of Western tourists, that Laos is now a legitimate target because the people there have slanty eyes.
But, fuck it, who needs a valid reason to bomb the shit out of a sovereign nation when you regard yourselves as being above the law, and you have a subservient media and a politically disengaged and apathetic public? Yesterdays Vietnam is today's Iraq. Today's Iraq is tomorrows Iran. And the carnage and the lies just go on, and on, and on.
0
g under p
Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,200
Muslim extremists attacked America. Therefore, Iraq was a legitimate target.
That's like saying that because some terrorists blew up a bar in Bali a few years ago and killed a bunch of Western tourists, that Laos is now a legitimate target because the people there have slanty eyes.
But, fuck it, who needs a valid reason to bomb the shit out of a sovereign nation when you regard yourselves as being above the law, and you have a subservient media and a politically disengaged and apathetic public? Yesterdays Vietnam is today's Iraq. Today's Iraq is tomorrows Iran. And the carnage and the lies just go on, and on, and on.
Word it appears we don't need much of any excuse to attack any nation even one where we sold arms and gave money to it's leader.
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
Jlew: "..there were many people in power who wanted to go to war with Iraq and keep America as a super power. I ask...SO WHAT. what does this prove? fact is, 9/11 was an attack on our country by Muslim extremists."
Jlew: "..there were many people in power who wanted to go to war with Iraq and keep America as a super power. I ask...SO WHAT. what does this prove? fact is, 9/11 was an attack on our country by Muslim extremists."
how does that statement have anything to do with this..
Muslim extremists attacked America. Therefore, Iraq was a legitimate target. ?
Jlew: "..there were many people in power who wanted to go to war with Iraq and keep America as a super power. I ask...SO WHAT. what does this prove? fact is, 9/11 was an attack on our country by Muslim extremists."
since you will mostly likely put words in my mouth and make your own conclusions, I'll be clear.
my statement is saying that many people in power in America wanted to go to war with Iraq. America was attacked on 9/11 by Muslim extremists. these are mutually exclusive statements. if you followed the conversation you might have a fucking clue as to what we were talking about. but I'd be asking way too much.
Nice attempt at backtracking and covering your ass. Shame you were too late.
Edit: At the very least it looks like someone around here needs to take a chill pill, as it looks like their mouth is running faster than their brain.
I'm gonna step back from the board for a while and just watch this train wreck unfold. :P
how am I backtracking? my statement is very clear and I'm not backtracking on anything i said. certain people, like you and Nibblets, believe that Bush and the PNAC planned or allowed 9/11 to happen so we can go into Iraq. I say Musilm extremists attacked us on 9/11, and Bush and co went into Iraq anyway. you always need things dumbed down for you. hopefully you take a long step back from this board. your act of putting words in peoples mouth and spinning things has grown so old.
Muslim extremists attacked America. Therefore, Iraq was a legitimate target.
That's like saying that because some terrorists blew up a bar in Bali a few years ago and killed a bunch of Western tourists, that Laos is now a legitimate target because the people there have slanty eyes.
But, fuck it, who needs a valid reason to bomb the shit out of a sovereign nation when you regard yourselves as being above the law, and you have a subservient media and a politically disengaged and apathetic public? Yesterdays Vietnam is today's Iraq. Today's Iraq is tomorrows Iran. And the carnage and the lies just go on, and on, and on.
but to embrace that logic shouldn't they say 9/11 was an acceptable loss, just some random collateral damage for all the civilians we've killed in other countries?
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
Muslim extremists attacked America. Therefore, Iraq was a legitimate target.
That's like saying that because some terrorists blew up a bar in Bali a few years ago and killed a bunch of Western tourists, that Laos is now a legitimate target because the people there have slanty eyes.
But, fuck it, who needs a valid reason to bomb the shit out of a sovereign nation when you regard yourselves as being above the law, and you have a subservient media and a politically disengaged and apathetic public? Yesterdays Vietnam is today's Iraq. Today's Iraq is tomorrows Iran. And the carnage and the lies just go on, and on, and on.
Word it appears we don't need much of any excuse to attack any nation even one where we sold arms and gave money to it's leader.
Peace
maybe 1 day governments will learn not to sell anyone weaponry. during Iran/Contra Israel was our go between transferring the thousands of missiles to the Iranians and now they claim Iran is supplying rockets to terrorists? and look at our past 5 wars: panama, iraq, kosovo, afghanistan, iraq. as far as i know the only 1 we didn't arm was kosovo. they sell weapons then sell weapons in the war to overthrow that hostile nation. just like Halliburton sold Iran supplies that could be used to build nuclear weapons and before 2000 he actually lobbied to have the ban on business with them and some other countries removed! not that he cared, they still violated US law and did business with a few countries
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
And not only that National Geographic had a 2 hr show called 911 conspiracy and science where they debunked all of Dr.Ray Griffith's and the 911 truthers claims on how they think the Towers were brought down. It made them look like a bunch of fools. I couldn't stop laughing. Every time they debunked one of their claims all they would say is Oh that's irrelevant or that's ridiculous. It was a damn joke.
National Geographic - or was it discovery? - also aired a show in which they claimed to debunk the 'conspiracy theories' surrounding the murder of JFK, and it was all just a whitewash. They debunked nothing but just made themselves lose credibility and look ridiculous.
It makes you wonder who pays their wages.
i caught part of this national geographic special, inside 9/11. sadly i only saw the 80's through mid 90's. but a few observations.
the entire time span of the muhjadeen it only mentioned the CIA 2 times. the first time it said only the CIA was there. the 2nd time is to say the CIA gave them the stinger rockets which allowed them to shoot down the helicopters.
there's no mention of US/CIA and other countries funding of this, in fact they make it look like islamic 'charities' funded them.
when they get to the part of bin laden creating what would become al qaeda, again, they make no mention of US and other countries dumping a lot of funds into it, bin laden was working with the CIA when he created this group. the only mention they make of the funding is making it seem like bin laden funded it entirely saying he used some of his fortune to create the group.
so, a little on the sloppy side, i'd say, in not mentioning the foreign governments who pumped money into him/them and never mentioned the ISI who were the go betweens for the CIA and muhjadeen, they helped distribute the money as well but none of this is mentioned, it's made to seem like it's 100% islamic funding
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
And not only that National Geographic had a 2 hr show called 911 conspiracy and science where they debunked all of Dr.Ray Griffith's and the 911 truthers claims on how they think the Towers were brought down. It made them look like a bunch of fools. I couldn't stop laughing. Every time they debunked one of their claims all they would say is Oh that's irrelevant or that's ridiculous. It was a damn joke.
National Geographic - or was it discovery? - also aired a show in which they claimed to debunk the 'conspiracy theories' surrounding the murder of JFK, and it was all just a whitewash. They debunked nothing but just made themselves lose credibility and look ridiculous.
It makes you wonder who pays their wages.
i caught part of this national geographic special, inside 9/11. sadly i only saw the 80's through mid 90's. but a few observations.
the entire time span of the muhjadeen it only mentioned the CIA 2 times. the first time it said only the CIA was there. the 2nd time is to say the CIA gave them the stinger rockets which allowed them to shoot down the helicopters.
there's no mention of US/CIA and other countries funding of this, in fact they make it look like islamic 'charities' funded them.
when they get to the part of bin laden creating what would become al qaeda, again, they make no mention of US and other countries dumping a lot of funds into it, bin laden was working with the CIA when he created this group. the only mention they make of the funding is making it seem like bin laden funded it entirely saying he used some of his fortune to create the group.
so, a little on the sloppy side, i'd say, in not mentioning the foreign governments who pumped money into him/them and never mentioned the ISI who were the go betweens for the CIA and muhjadeen, they helped distribute the money as well but none of this is mentioned, it's made to seem like it's 100% islamic funding
i'm sure the 2nd 1/2 is where it starts to get factual :roll:
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
I've found that this logic usually holds true in every complex situation that I find myself in... it might be good for the 'truthers' to at least take a glance and consider the implications:
Additionally, like I originally posted, everyone's mind contains a 'thinker' and a 'prover.' If you truely believe in something, you will find ways to prove it is true. This essentially is all the "Secret" is, if you've ever read the book. Be careful with this, because it seems like some people believe in the 9/11 conspiracies to such an extent that no matter how much evidence is stacked up against them or whatever assumptions are proven wrong, they will replace those assumptions with new ones to 'prove' what they think or believe. I have found it good to believe in nothing (except love and optimism) and be open to all points of view. ok ok, i'll stop this existentialist diatribe.
Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
I've found that this logic usually holds true in every complex situation that I find myself in... it might be good for the 'truthers' to at least take a glance and consider the implications:
Additionally, like I originally posted, everyone's mind contains a 'thinker' and a 'prover.' If you truely believe in something, you will find ways to prove it is true. This essentially is all the "Secret" is, if you've ever read the book. Be careful with this, because it seems like some people believe in the 9/11 conspiracies to such an extent that no matter how much evidence is stacked up against them or whatever assumptions are proven wrong, they will replace those assumptions with new ones to 'prove' what they think or believe. I have found it good to believe in nothing (except love and optimism) and be open to all points of view. ok ok, i'll stop this existentialist diatribe.
would the reverse not apply here? ... that those who refuse to believe that 9/11 could be an inside job?
all i know about 9/11 is this: since then - personal freedoms have been limited in the US; two wars have been waged against sovereign nations; military spending is up; profits for oil companies have skyrocketed; profits for engineering companies have skyrocketed ...
would the reverse not apply here? ... that those who refuse to believe that 9/11 could be an inside job?
all i know about 9/11 is this: since then - personal freedoms have been limited in the US; two wars have been waged against sovereign nations; military spending is up; profits for oil companies have skyrocketed; profits for engineering companies have skyrocketed ...
personal freedoms are not limited in the US. I'm just as free as I was on 9/10/01 except for tighter security at airports and other places of importance.
and profits for oil companies only have skyrocketed because of higher demand for oil. which is completely irrelevant to anything to 9/11 or any wars
personal freedoms are not limited in the US. I'm just as free as I was on 9/10/01 except for tighter security at airports and other places of importance.
and profits for oil companies only have skyrocketed because of higher demand for oil. which is completely irrelevant to anything to 9/11 or any wars
higher demand? ... you THINK the skyrocketing cost of oil in the international markets is based on demand???????
personal freedoms are not limited in the US. I'm just as free as I was on 9/10/01 except for tighter security at airports and other places of importance.
and profits for oil companies only have skyrocketed because of higher demand for oil. which is completely irrelevant to anything to 9/11 or any wars
higher demand? ... you THINK the skyrocketing cost of oil in the international markets is based on demand???????
yes, absolutely. the price of oil is traded on the open market. thus making speculators are part of that demand as well just as much as SUV owners..
personal freedoms are not limited in the US. I'm just as free as I was on 9/10/01 except for tighter security at airports and other places of importance.
and profits for oil companies only have skyrocketed because of higher demand for oil. which is completely irrelevant to anything to 9/11 or any wars
higher demand? ... you THINK the skyrocketing cost of oil in the international markets is based on demand???????
yes, absolutely. the price of oil is traded on the open market. thus making speculators are part of that demand as well just as much as SUV owners..
i think you need to read an economists definition of "demand." Speculation is certainly not part of it. $70/barrel was due to speculation when it was priced at $150. Same thing goes with corn (I work in agriculture)... during the past few years $1 can be added per bushel due to speculation, other than during profit taking periods.
Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
i think you need to read an economists definition of "demand." Speculation is certainly not part of it. $70/barrel was due to speculation when it was priced at $150. Same thing goes with corn (I work in agriculture)... during the past few years $1 can be added per bushel due to speculation, other than during profit taking periods.
speculators were also partly responsible for bring the price of oil back to $40. its a classic move to blame them on the way up and praise them on the way down. either way, they take on the risk and move the price along with they believe demand for the product will be. they are part of the supply and demand curve.
i think you need to read an economists definition of "demand." Speculation is certainly not part of it. $70/barrel was due to speculation when it was priced at $150. Same thing goes with corn (I work in agriculture)... during the past few years $1 can be added per bushel due to speculation, other than during profit taking periods.
speculators were also partly responsible for bring the price of oil back to $40. its a classic move to blame them on the way up and praise them on the way down. either way, they take on the risk and move the price along with they believe demand for the product will be. they are part of the supply and demand curve.
"part of the supply and demand curve" ?????
so you'd agree that speculation isn't "TRUE DEMAND." Dude you don't have to use language to conceal meaning... you can also use it to convey meaning.
Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
Comments
they also had members like cheney, rumsfeld, wolfowitz, scooter libby........they got what they wanted, didn't they?
we invaded iraq
we broke the nuclear nonproliferation treaty
we increased defense spending
we militarized space.....
who cares if PNAC still exists now? i said Bush was a puppet for their agendas. everyone knows Bush didn't know much of what was going on during his 8 years
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
so based on their obvious agenda, that has been common knowledge since the late 80s, they planned and executed 9/11? or at the least sat back and all agreed to let our country get attacked? is that really what you believe?
yes he did. he made the final decision. thats what Presidents do. Cheney has recently been quoted saying he was upset with Bush becasuse he didn't always follow his advising.
you have a closed mind, try to think a little on your own and not believe everything you read at face value.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
he makes it all too easy to expose. as clearly seen above. you have anything constructive to add? are you a truther too?
http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/pentagon/images/13.jpg
Be careful. Some will say that is nothing more than an oversized pic of the St. Louis 98 PJ concert. Same colors and it involves a plane. Shhhhhhhhhhhh
http://www.fivehorizons.com/tour/mem/post_STL98.gif
sigh i already stated twice in this thread that i didn't know what happened.
you are the 1 who asks a question then have it answered only to ask a million more....you stated we never conceived of airplanes being used to attack us....i gave you a link to a usa today article talking about NORAD running drills in 1999 of hijacked airplanes being crashed into the wtc and pentagon and other buildings and you don't address it, you just asked more questions.
Bush was a puppet for PNAC plain and simple. it doesn't matter that they are no longer around, members of PNAC were all through the white house from VP to sec of Defense to advisors, Cheney's cheif of staff....Bush was the face. He even admitted he doesn't read or look into things very much, he relies on what his advisers and those around him tell him. in other words, he does as he's told.
i remember in 04 he had a town hall type meeting and a girl asked him about making cuts to the student loan program and other programs just a day or 2 before this meeting. Bush had no fucking clue what she was talking about! he even asked her if she was sure! he's an idiot period. he didn't always do everything Cheney said but he did enough. Read PNAC's paper from 2000 and tell me most of that agenda didn't get enacted during Bush's first term.
like i said, i don't know what happened but people should be allowed to ask questions without all the hostility and attacks. a lot doesn't add up.
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
yeah, until it was proven and then most people just shrugged and could care less....
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
what would you like me to address? we ran drills, so what? the drills obviously failed as we were not prepared that day. you say what exactly? that it was allowed to happen?
no he wasn't. you sound like a brain washed Alex Jones soldier.
what the fuck are you getting at? that the PNAC, included Bush, allowed 9/11 to happen?
asking questions is one thing and accusing the PNAC and Bush of allowing the 9/11 attacks to happen is another.
there were many people in power who wanted to go to war with Iraq and keep America as a super power. I ask...SO WHAT. what does this prove? fact is, 9/11 was an attack on our country by Muslim extremists. Bush, Cheney, PNAC had nothing to do with it
Muslim extremists attacked America. Therefore, Iraq was a legitimate target.
That's like saying that because some terrorists blew up a bar in Bali a few years ago and killed a bunch of Western tourists, that Laos is now a legitimate target because the people there have slanty eyes.
But, fuck it, who needs a valid reason to bomb the shit out of a sovereign nation when you regard yourselves as being above the law, and you have a subservient media and a politically disengaged and apathetic public? Yesterdays Vietnam is today's Iraq. Today's Iraq is tomorrows Iran. And the carnage and the lies just go on, and on, and on.
Word it appears we don't need much of any excuse to attack any nation even one where we sold arms and gave money to it's leader.
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
who said this?
how does that statement have anything to do with this..
Muslim extremists attacked America. Therefore, Iraq was a legitimate target. ?
since you will mostly likely put words in my mouth and make your own conclusions, I'll be clear.
my statement is saying that many people in power in America wanted to go to war with Iraq. America was attacked on 9/11 by Muslim extremists. these are mutually exclusive statements. if you followed the conversation you might have a fucking clue as to what we were talking about. but I'd be asking way too much.
Edit: At the very least it looks like someone around here needs to take a chill pill, as it looks like their mouth is running faster than their brain.
I'm gonna step back from the board for a while and just watch this train wreck unfold. :P
i like how this thread totally proved my point
the demonizing of people's independent thought is quite rampant ... just cuz you call people "crazy" or whatever you want doesn't make it so ...
how am I backtracking? my statement is very clear and I'm not backtracking on anything i said. certain people, like you and Nibblets, believe that Bush and the PNAC planned or allowed 9/11 to happen so we can go into Iraq. I say Musilm extremists attacked us on 9/11, and Bush and co went into Iraq anyway. you always need things dumbed down for you. hopefully you take a long step back from this board. your act of putting words in peoples mouth and spinning things has grown so old.
but to embrace that logic shouldn't they say 9/11 was an acceptable loss, just some random collateral damage for all the civilians we've killed in other countries?
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
maybe 1 day governments will learn not to sell anyone weaponry. during Iran/Contra Israel was our go between transferring the thousands of missiles to the Iranians and now they claim Iran is supplying rockets to terrorists? and look at our past 5 wars: panama, iraq, kosovo, afghanistan, iraq. as far as i know the only 1 we didn't arm was kosovo. they sell weapons then sell weapons in the war to overthrow that hostile nation. just like Halliburton sold Iran supplies that could be used to build nuclear weapons and before 2000 he actually lobbied to have the ban on business with them and some other countries removed! not that he cared, they still violated US law and did business with a few countries
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
i caught part of this national geographic special, inside 9/11. sadly i only saw the 80's through mid 90's. but a few observations.
the entire time span of the muhjadeen it only mentioned the CIA 2 times. the first time it said only the CIA was there. the 2nd time is to say the CIA gave them the stinger rockets which allowed them to shoot down the helicopters.
there's no mention of US/CIA and other countries funding of this, in fact they make it look like islamic 'charities' funded them.
when they get to the part of bin laden creating what would become al qaeda, again, they make no mention of US and other countries dumping a lot of funds into it, bin laden was working with the CIA when he created this group. the only mention they make of the funding is making it seem like bin laden funded it entirely saying he used some of his fortune to create the group.
so, a little on the sloppy side, i'd say, in not mentioning the foreign governments who pumped money into him/them and never mentioned the ISI who were the go betweens for the CIA and muhjadeen, they helped distribute the money as well but none of this is mentioned, it's made to seem like it's 100% islamic funding
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
i'm sure the 2nd 1/2 is where it starts to get factual :roll:
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occams_razor
Additionally, like I originally posted, everyone's mind contains a 'thinker' and a 'prover.' If you truely believe in something, you will find ways to prove it is true. This essentially is all the "Secret" is, if you've ever read the book. Be careful with this, because it seems like some people believe in the 9/11 conspiracies to such an extent that no matter how much evidence is stacked up against them or whatever assumptions are proven wrong, they will replace those assumptions with new ones to 'prove' what they think or believe. I have found it good to believe in nothing (except love and optimism) and be open to all points of view. ok ok, i'll stop this existentialist diatribe.
would the reverse not apply here? ... that those who refuse to believe that 9/11 could be an inside job?
all i know about 9/11 is this: since then - personal freedoms have been limited in the US; two wars have been waged against sovereign nations; military spending is up; profits for oil companies have skyrocketed; profits for engineering companies have skyrocketed ...
personal freedoms are not limited in the US. I'm just as free as I was on 9/10/01 except for tighter security at airports and other places of importance.
and profits for oil companies only have skyrocketed because of higher demand for oil. which is completely irrelevant to anything to 9/11 or any wars
higher demand? ... you THINK the skyrocketing cost of oil in the international markets is based on demand???????
yes, absolutely. the price of oil is traded on the open market. thus making speculators are part of that demand as well just as much as SUV owners..
i think you need to read an economists definition of "demand." Speculation is certainly not part of it. $70/barrel was due to speculation when it was priced at $150. Same thing goes with corn (I work in agriculture)... during the past few years $1 can be added per bushel due to speculation, other than during profit taking periods.
speculators were also partly responsible for bring the price of oil back to $40. its a classic move to blame them on the way up and praise them on the way down. either way, they take on the risk and move the price along with they believe demand for the product will be. they are part of the supply and demand curve.
"part of the supply and demand curve" ?????
so you'd agree that speculation isn't "TRUE DEMAND." Dude you don't have to use language to conceal meaning... you can also use it to convey meaning.