What a buffoon and his ridiculous statement is a disgrace to anyone representing an entire nation of peoples'. It's bad enough we have conspiracy theorists running around, but for a government official of any nation to speak such idiocy is a crime... and it's no different than the denial of the holocaust or the many other ridiculous and outlandish statements made in the similar.
I recognize that fact, but that still doesn't equate to any type of definitive or logical answer leading people to believe in a serious fashion that 9-11 was caused in some way by the US government. Like I said before, it's a leap beyond facts and certainly nothing more than assumption, hearsay and cause, but not fact...and facts determine guilt or innocence.
I find it very ironic that all the people who call for the "truth" and similar on these matters completely throw out all the basic aspects of a fair, balanced and judicious court system applied to the issue simply in order to get their own answer, which in many respects, they already believe.[/u] Why do you think that is?? Perhaps a lack of real fact?
What people are asking for is for all of the 115 points I posted above to be addressed in a court of law, or in an independent enquiry. And all of the points above are facts - every one of them. They're not just whimsical notions thrown out for the sheer sake of it, but serious ommisions in the original government investigation.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
I recognize that fact, but that still doesn't equate to any type of definitive or logical answer leading people to believe in a serious fashion that 9-11 was caused in some way by the US government. Like I said before, it's a leap beyond facts and certainly nothing more than assumption, hearsay and cause, but not fact...and facts determine guilt or innocence.
Do you think the neo-cons benefitted in any way from 9/11? You ever read the 'Project For a New American Century' reports from late 2000-early 2001? They got exactly what they were looking for.
You say that suggesting the U.S government had a hand in the attacks - even just to the extent that they had prior knowledge of them and turned a blind eye to them - is a leap beyond facts? It's a fact the top brass of the Bush Adminstration were in possession of documents that outlined the attacks using hijacked aircraft and they chose to ignore that information. And that's just the start of it. Did you read the 115 points raised above? Can you account for any of them? Why won't the U.S government allow an independent enquiry if they have nothing to hide?
Yes I'm very familiar with that document and group, and albeit mention of such a thing is discussed in passing, it is taken out of the time frame and context. Analyzing a policy piece and manifesting it into some type of smoking gun for saying "hey look, they said they would do or allow something like this to happen" is nothing more than misguided commentary and all after the fact. And to be clear, if you read that document thoroughly, there's plenty of things discussed which have never, ever come to fruition about security in our nation amongst many other topics... so to take one sentence and turn it into evidence of some sort after the fact of the event is misplaced to say the least.
In terms of your comments about the government, I obviously admit there's plenty of information that has gone unanswered or is deemed classified for whatever the reasons (some perhaps valid, some perhaps not), but in the end of the day, the amount of factual evidence doesn't amount to all that much. Other than saying, the government either dropped the ball or ignored such warnings, which is easy to say from the outside, but we really don't know the other half of the story and perhaps never will. I'm not defending the government, but merely detracting from applying guilt when the proof is not thorough or solid - the rest is completely a leap. So in sum, I find it ridiculous and over the top when anyone applies guilt to because of that.. whether it's this topic or any other crime in society. I would hope most people do the same as that is justice, innocence til proven guilty.. not the other way around.
Do you think the neo-cons benefitted in any way from 9/11? You ever read the 'Project For a New American Century' reports from late 2000-early 2001? They got exactly what they were looking for.
You say that suggesting the U.S government had a hand in the attacks - even just to the extent that they had prior knowledge of them and turned a blind eye to them - is a leap beyond facts? It's a fact the top brass of the Bush Adminstration were in possession of documents that outlined the attacks using hijacked aircraft and they chose to ignore that information. And that's just the start of it. Did you read the 115 points raised above? Can you account for any of them? Why won't the U.S government allow an independent enquiry if they have nothing to hide?
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
It seems to me that there are more then a few of my fellow pit members that would enjoy living in Iran more then America. There's nothing wrong with that, to each their own.
the facts are the facts - I'm not saying I support Ahmadinejad or that I rather live in Iran(lame, :roll: ), but what Ahmadinejad is saying has a lot of truths to it. And Byrnzie did an excellent job of representing some of those facts, with out being biased .....
the facts are the facts - I'm not saying I support Ahmadinejad or that I rather live in Iran(lame, :roll: ), but what Ahmadinejad is saying has a lot of truths to it. And Byrnzie did an excellent job of representing some of those facts, with out being biased .....
:thumbup:
Yeah.
The comment that some of the board members would rather live in Iran is as lame as the comment that people who disagree with any given administration or policy "hate America" ("and should leave"), or even Bush's comment that "either you are with 'US' or you are with the terrorists". The two do not logically follow. ever.
As far as Ahmadinejad's comments, this has been discussed here ad naseum.
Ahmadinejad has made it exceedingly clear that when he said the holocaust was a "myth" (which according to arabic experts is a mistranslation any way, a word that doesn't even exist in arabic) that what he was trying to communicate (and what the rest of his speech FOLLOWING that specific sentence actually makes explicit) is that the FACTS of the holocaust have been woven by those wishing to USE the even for the furtherance of their own agenda have been turned in to a "myth" (ie. a continually repeated story) about the plight of the jews.
Again, he has made it EXCEEDINGLY clear that his intention was NOT to "deny" that the holocaust happened, but that he was attempting to convey that the murder of jews in the holocaust was OVERemphasized (and he does NOT mean "distorted" or "numbers were misleading") by those with an agenda as a PRETEXT for the furtherance of a Zionist state and agenda.
TO BE FAIR, HIS POINT IS VALID.
The death of the jews in WWII was absolutely the largest "pretext" used for the establishment of the State of Israel (the LITERAL definition of "Zionism"!) in 1948.
You may agree or disagree with the modern relevance of Amadinejad's gripe, but his comment is factual and, if you ask me, valid.
The murder of jews in the holocaust, WAS, in FACT, USED to justify the establishment of a Zionist state.
I don't lend ANY more support to Ahmadinejad than pure recognition of the fact that his comment was DELIBERATELY distorted to
a. obscure his ACTUAL point
b. discredit his image on the international scene, and to drum up global antagonism to his regime.
Obviously religious fundamentalist dictatorship is an outmoded governmental form, and "his" "kind" should be on the phase out in the "new order of the ages".
PS - I also happen to think he is right about current US antagonism to Iran's nuclear ambitions.
The International Atomic Energy Agency has REPEATEDLY given Iran the stamp of approval in ALL of their reports on Iran's nuclear program. Their current enrichment scheme is NO WHERE NEAR the levels of enrichment needed for nuclear WEAPONS. Again, the IAEA has stated FULL compliance with international standards for ENERGY production, and has stated in no uncertain terms that Iran CONTINUES to enrich uranium to NOTHING OVER 4%, as opposed TO THE OVER 94% NEEDED FOR WEAPONS PRODUCTION.
This is international-power-politics being played out, with Iran being "victimized" by the US for attempting to secure a future energy independence given the uncertain (and potentially dwindling) nature of Iran's oil reserves. That is to say, the US (and all Anglophile governments) DO NOT WANT A STRONG INDEPENDENT IRANIAN STATE.
It is anathema to their broader goal of an Anglicized "new economic world order".
If need be, i can quote SPECIFIC reference to this FACT by NWO insider historian Carroll Quigley, himself.
This has been a CENTURY (or more) long antagonism between Iran and the Anglophile establishment. It is nothing new.
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
I think it's perfectly obvious to any honest person that the Israeli leadership would like to see Iran reduced to ashes - regardless of the cost in human lives.
All this talk about Ahmajinedad is just bluster and hot air. The Israeli's are looking for any excuse they can find to obliterate Iran and dominate the Middle East.
I think it's pretty sad that so many people are buying into their war-mongering bullshit.
So much for the phrase 'Never again!' :roll:
Are you serious? Israel is looking to dominate the Middle East, huh? It's obvious the Iranian president hack has been looking for a reason to destroy Israel. Also, given his response to being VOTED OUT BY HIS OWN PEOPLE, the reactions to him by the world community and Israel is not hot air. He's a dictator asshole of the highest order.
Also, he has openly proclaimed his desire to destroy Israel!
How is it that so many people speak of peace, yet defend a man who would murder innocents? It was mentioned in an earlier post, that, if Israel "destroyed" Iran, civilians would perish. I'm guessing no civilians would die if this prick fired a nuclear-tipped rocket into Tel-Aviv?
It seems to me that there are more then a few of my fellow pit members that would enjoy living in Iran more then America. There's nothing wrong with that, to each their own.
jlew is that you?
what a ridiculous thing to say.
anyway, feel free to actually contribute something to the thread like others here have done rather than just taking cheap shots.
It seems to me that there are more then a few of my fellow pit members that would enjoy living in Iran more then America. There's nothing wrong with that, to each their own.
jlew is that you?
what a ridiculous thing to say.
anyway, feel free to actually contribute something to the thread like others here have done rather than just taking cheap shots.
agreed. no one is defending iranian policies, they are simply presenting a more accurate view of reality.
to demonize iran at this point only serves 1 purpose: to gain public consent for a push to war, the worst possible outcome in this situation.
Yes, it is the very same homosexuality denying man. Apparently, he believes that Iran is such an "enlightened" society that there are no gay people there (which of course also assumes that the presence of homosexuals in our own society is the manifestation of some sort of perversion). But I'm sure B can explain that this was only meant as a way of criticizing Zionism, and we are all simply misunderstanding him yet again. :roll:
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
So your opinion is that no one should voice any criticism of Iran, because in your opinion it is all just a "push for war"? No matter what Iran does, they should be immune from criticism? That seems a very selective departure from your normal stance on the importance of criticizing.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
So your opinion is that no one should voice any criticism of Iran, because in your opinion it is all just a "push for war"? No matter what Iran does, they should be immune from criticism? That seems a very selective departure from your normal stance on the importance of criticizing.
what can you do about the iranian government's faults?
aside from war, NOTHING.
focus on your own government, that is something you can affect.
Would you apply the same logic to Israel? If so, I'd like to see you shut up about that issue as well. Or do you hold the two countries to entirely different standards?
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
So your opinion is that no one should voice any criticism of Iran, because in your opinion it is all just a "push for war"? No matter what Iran does, they should be immune from criticism? That seems a very selective departure from your normal stance on the importance of criticizing.
i don't believe i have said anywhere at anytime that no one should voice criticism of Iran.
Would you apply the same logic to Israel? If so, I'd like to see you shut up about that issue as well. Or do you hold the two countries to entirely different standards?
my country's aid to Israel maybe the only reason they are able to continue with their atrocities.
things like cast lead would have been impossible were it not for US support.
The US is almost an exception to that rule, being an empire and all.
I find it very ironic that all the people who call for the "truth" and similar on these matters completely throw out all the basic aspects of a fair, balanced and judicious court system applied to the issue simply in order to get their own answer, which in many respects, they already believe. Why do you think that is?? Perhaps a lack of real fact? In case you don't recall, in the actual justice system, you have to prove why someone is guilty, not actually merely provide hearsay, accusation or motive.. but actual details to show guilt and once that is proven, we say justice is done. Perhaps "truthers" just heed their own advice.
Does this not perfectly describe what the commision did? They threw out all aspects of a fair, balanced, and judicious court system in order to get answers they already believed. Unless I'm mistaken, that is what Byrnzie, myself, that demon spawn Ahmadinejad, and all other 'truthers' are looking for - an independant investigation that is not corrupted and stonewalled by the people accused by some of involvement.
Given the questions Byrnzie listed, can you actually say that you feel Al Qaeda's guilt was proven, and justice was done?....I doubt it...THAT is why people demand another investigation. Not because they didn't get the result they want, but because there was NEVER a PROPER investigation done!
The truthers should heed their own advice, because their unproven accusations result in....what? overuse of the internet? Overactive imaginations?
What did the unproven accusations against Al Qaeda result in?
It seems to me that there are more then a few of my fellow pit members that would enjoy living in Iran more then America. There's nothing wrong with that, to each their own.
cant beat that logic.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Dude Al Qaida claimed credit for the attack. On video. Repeatedly. They were really, really happy about it.
Great essay called "The Paranoid Style in American Politics." I think about it more and more every day. Especially when I'm on this site.
sigh....you avoided every point I made to focus on the one to which you knew my response. Those videos are disputed by truthers.
Anything to say about the way your statement applies equally to the only investigation undertaken regarding the attacks?
It seems to me that there are more then a few of my fellow pit members that would enjoy living in Iran more then America. There's nothing wrong with that, to each their own.
cant beat that logic.
logic? maybe i'm missing something? anyone wanna fill me in? people really think some people here would prefer to live in Iran. really?
Comments
I agree.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Do you think the neo-cons benefitted in any way from 9/11? You ever read the 'Project For a New American Century' reports from late 2000-early 2001? They got exactly what they were looking for.
You say that suggesting the U.S government had a hand in the attacks - even just to the extent that they had prior knowledge of them and turned a blind eye to them - is a leap beyond facts? It's a fact the top brass of the Bush Adminstration were in possession of documents that outlined the attacks using hijacked aircraft and they chose to ignore that information. And that's just the start of it. Did you read the 115 points raised above? Can you account for any of them? Why won't the U.S government allow an independent enquiry if they have nothing to hide?
In terms of your comments about the government, I obviously admit there's plenty of information that has gone unanswered or is deemed classified for whatever the reasons (some perhaps valid, some perhaps not), but in the end of the day, the amount of factual evidence doesn't amount to all that much. Other than saying, the government either dropped the ball or ignored such warnings, which is easy to say from the outside, but we really don't know the other half of the story and perhaps never will. I'm not defending the government, but merely detracting from applying guilt when the proof is not thorough or solid - the rest is completely a leap. So in sum, I find it ridiculous and over the top when anyone applies guilt to because of that.. whether it's this topic or any other crime in society. I would hope most people do the same as that is justice, innocence til proven guilty.. not the other way around.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
The poison from the poison stream caught up to you ELEVEN years ago and you floated out of here. Sept. 14, 08
the facts are the facts - I'm not saying I support Ahmadinejad or that I rather live in Iran(lame, :roll: ), but what Ahmadinejad is saying has a lot of truths to it. And Byrnzie did an excellent job of representing some of those facts, with out being biased .....
:thumbup:
Yeah.
The comment that some of the board members would rather live in Iran is as lame as the comment that people who disagree with any given administration or policy "hate America" ("and should leave"), or even Bush's comment that "either you are with 'US' or you are with the terrorists". The two do not logically follow. ever.
As far as Ahmadinejad's comments, this has been discussed here ad naseum.
Ahmadinejad has made it exceedingly clear that when he said the holocaust was a "myth" (which according to arabic experts is a mistranslation any way, a word that doesn't even exist in arabic) that what he was trying to communicate (and what the rest of his speech FOLLOWING that specific sentence actually makes explicit) is that the FACTS of the holocaust have been woven by those wishing to USE the even for the furtherance of their own agenda have been turned in to a "myth" (ie. a continually repeated story) about the plight of the jews.
Again, he has made it EXCEEDINGLY clear that his intention was NOT to "deny" that the holocaust happened, but that he was attempting to convey that the murder of jews in the holocaust was OVERemphasized (and he does NOT mean "distorted" or "numbers were misleading") by those with an agenda as a PRETEXT for the furtherance of a Zionist state and agenda.
TO BE FAIR, HIS POINT IS VALID.
The death of the jews in WWII was absolutely the largest "pretext" used for the establishment of the State of Israel (the LITERAL definition of "Zionism"!) in 1948.
You may agree or disagree with the modern relevance of Amadinejad's gripe, but his comment is factual and, if you ask me, valid.
The murder of jews in the holocaust, WAS, in FACT, USED to justify the establishment of a Zionist state.
I don't lend ANY more support to Ahmadinejad than pure recognition of the fact that his comment was DELIBERATELY distorted to
a. obscure his ACTUAL point
b. discredit his image on the international scene, and to drum up global antagonism to his regime.
Obviously religious fundamentalist dictatorship is an outmoded governmental form, and "his" "kind" should be on the phase out in the "new order of the ages".
PS - I also happen to think he is right about current US antagonism to Iran's nuclear ambitions.
The International Atomic Energy Agency has REPEATEDLY given Iran the stamp of approval in ALL of their reports on Iran's nuclear program. Their current enrichment scheme is NO WHERE NEAR the levels of enrichment needed for nuclear WEAPONS. Again, the IAEA has stated FULL compliance with international standards for ENERGY production, and has stated in no uncertain terms that Iran CONTINUES to enrich uranium to NOTHING OVER 4%, as opposed TO THE OVER 94% NEEDED FOR WEAPONS PRODUCTION.
This is international-power-politics being played out, with Iran being "victimized" by the US for attempting to secure a future energy independence given the uncertain (and potentially dwindling) nature of Iran's oil reserves. That is to say, the US (and all Anglophile governments) DO NOT WANT A STRONG INDEPENDENT IRANIAN STATE.
It is anathema to their broader goal of an Anglicized "new economic world order".
If need be, i can quote SPECIFIC reference to this FACT by NWO insider historian Carroll Quigley, himself.
This has been a CENTURY (or more) long antagonism between Iran and the Anglophile establishment. It is nothing new.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Are you serious? Israel is looking to dominate the Middle East, huh? It's obvious the Iranian president hack has been looking for a reason to destroy Israel. Also, given his response to being VOTED OUT BY HIS OWN PEOPLE, the reactions to him by the world community and Israel is not hot air. He's a dictator asshole of the highest order.
How is it that so many people speak of peace, yet defend a man who would murder innocents? It was mentioned in an earlier post, that, if Israel "destroyed" Iran, civilians would perish. I'm guessing no civilians would die if this prick fired a nuclear-tipped rocket into Tel-Aviv?
What the hell? Seriously?
Hail, Hail!!!
what a ridiculous thing to say.
anyway, feel free to actually contribute something to the thread like others here have done rather than just taking cheap shots.
Oh wait...I guess so.
Seriously this is bat crazy shit.
to demonize iran at this point only serves 1 purpose: to gain public consent for a push to war, the worst possible outcome in this situation.
but like i already said, at the same time i will not sit back and give this push for war any credibility.
aside from war, NOTHING.
focus on your own government, that is something you can affect.
so i have no idea what you are taking about.
things like cast lead would have been impossible were it not for US support.
The US is almost an exception to that rule, being an empire and all.
the push is on, just watch a half hour of tv news...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Does this not perfectly describe what the commision did? They threw out all aspects of a fair, balanced, and judicious court system in order to get answers they already believed. Unless I'm mistaken, that is what Byrnzie, myself, that demon spawn Ahmadinejad, and all other 'truthers' are looking for - an independant investigation that is not corrupted and stonewalled by the people accused by some of involvement.
Given the questions Byrnzie listed, can you actually say that you feel Al Qaeda's guilt was proven, and justice was done?....I doubt it...THAT is why people demand another investigation. Not because they didn't get the result they want, but because there was NEVER a PROPER investigation done!
The truthers should heed their own advice, because their unproven accusations result in....what? overuse of the internet? Overactive imaginations?
What did the unproven accusations against Al Qaeda result in?
Well....they don't have juice boxes in Iran, now do they?
Dude Al Qaida claimed credit for the attack. On video. Repeatedly. They were really, really happy about it.
Great essay called "The Paranoid Style in American Politics." I think about it more and more every day. Especially when I'm on this site.
that's a lie.
lol. i got it.
haha.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Anything to say about the way your statement applies equally to the only investigation undertaken regarding the attacks?