American and Malaysian elections: A Lesson for Singapore
-
Originally posted by freedomclub:
By the way, Palin didn't say that. Tina Fey said that. Another instance of media conditioning.
I didn't say Palin said it did I? What "media conditioning"? You are good at jumping to conclusions.
You know it was Tina that said it? Good for you and that would make it seems like you are a normal person but when you said this...
Originally posted by freedomclub:And if the official story doesnt stand. The justification for the War on Terror just doesnt stand. Is your saviour president-elect "change" willing to open an honest investigation into 9/11 to question the corporate-political agenda of a War of Terror that increases profits?
I conjectured that it was carried out by intelligence agencies. Comparing the official story with its loopholes, one is likely to believe that the government is hiding its involvement in 9/11.
"I conjectured that it was carried out by intelligence agencies. "
...you cannot blame people for thinking that you have a few screw loose up there.
The US government is involved in 911 as in, participating in the murder of 3000 innocent americans so that some nameless corporations can hope for more profits?
Bizzarre....
-
Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
Fox (American Idol, The Simpsons...) News, it was clear, favoured the republicans and like you said, "I can see russia from my house" Palin, deserved it.
Did you mean that Palin said that or not?
Look, I'm not for the republicans or democrats. its just a sham. But the way the MSM spun it made most Americans think that Palin did, and contributed to more support for Obama.
-
Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
........
"I conjectured that it was carried out by intelligence agencies. "
...you cannot blame people for thinking that you have a few screw loose up there.
The US government is involved in 911 as in, participating in the murder of 3000 innocent americans so that some nameless corporations can hope for more profits?
Bizzarre....
Not only profits (Haliburton, the Caryle Group, all the defence companies [arms merchants in general]- they're not nameless), the war plans for the Afghanistan invasion and the PATRIOT Act was already conveniently waiting for a suitable justification; justification which 9/11 provided.
And besides, the US government already has a track record for carrying out terrorist attacks.
During the Cold War, the CIA funded the Gladio network in Western Europe which bombed public places and blamed it on the communists. In 1962, Operation Northwoods was drafted and it stated:
"...have considered...a request...for brief but precise description of pretexts which would provide justification for US military intervention in Cuba."
"...based on the premise that US military intervention will result from a period of heightened US-Cuban tensions which place the [US] in the position of suffering justifiable grievances."
"Such a plan would enable a logical build-up of incidents to be combined with other seemingly unrelated events to camouflage the ultimate objective and create the necessary impression of Cuban rashness and irresponsibility on a large scale, directed at other countries as well as the [US]."
"A series of well coordinated incidents will be planned to take place in and around Guantanamo to give genuine appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces...land friendly Cubans in uniform "over-the-fence" to stage attack on base...blow up ammunition inside the base; start fires...burn aircraft on air base...lob mortar shells from outside of base into base...sabotage ship in harbour...sink ship near habour entrance..."
"...blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba...blow up a drone (unmanned) vessel anywhere in the Cuban waters... We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington..."http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf
Fortunately, JFK didnt go through with it.
But the precedent is clear, governments have planned and carried out terrorist attacks to further their political aims. Are we to expect anything is different, especially in today's focus on terrorism?
-
May be possible, but still need evidence to proof.
Castro: U.S. uses al-Qaeda to justify foreign policy
-
If you mean evidence like the Northwoods Documents to prove that the US Govt planned 9/11, then you'll never know. I'll believe that terrorist attacks are usually staged by western intelligence agencies for the benefit of some political agenda, given the historical precedent and their fingerprints all over recent terrorist attacks. It is the exception when terrorism is the act of some fanatical muslim plotting to destroy western civilisation.
Who really stands to benefits when civil liberties are reduced and police powers are stepped up?
Well, Operation Northwoods was targetted at Castro. Its only fitting that Castro knows the whole modus operandi of the CIA.
-
It is the exception when terrorism is the act of some fanatical muslim plotting to destroy western civilisation.
There are fanatical groups out to target states also.
-
Yeah, funded by the CIA or other agencies just like how they funded the fanatical Mujahedeen.
How easy would it be to destabilise regions like that. All you need to do is provide some weapons and cash, plant some ideas and you're good to go. Dont forget this is the world's largest and most well-funded intelligence agency.
-
Yeah, funded by the CIA or other agencies just like how they funded the fanatical Mujahedeen.
Not all.
Dont forget this is the world's largest and most well-funded intelligence agency.
Actually their funding is quite restricted by congress.
-
Thats where the CIA's drug dealings come in.
"Black" projects provide a part of it.
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
May be possible, but still need evidence to proof.
Castro: U.S. uses al-Qaeda to justify foreign policy
Do you really need the headlies, I mean headlines to read "9/11 was an inside job" to believe that false-flag operations do take place?
How about putting together a worldview based on information which you already know instead of relying on what people say to form your worldview?
From the evidence, one can deduce the the US Govt had complicity and even staged the attacks to justify geopolitical and political aims. If you want to rely on sanitised and whitewashed information that refuses to engage in straight talk because it is politically incorrect, then how can you perceive the true nature of things?
-
oh noes... are u a believer of the 9/11 conspiracy thingy bob ? ;p
-
Originally posted by freedomclub:
Official story: 19 hijackers, 15 of them from Saudi Arabia, hijacked four planes and crashed two of them into WTC 1 and 2, collapsing them. One into the Pentagon. One crashed in Pennsylvania.
Problem with official story #1: Some of the alleged hijackers are still alive, reported the BBC
Problem #2: If 2 planes crashed into the Twin Towers, then what caused WTC 7 to collapse in the same exact manner almost 8 hours later?
Problem #3: Why did eye-witnesses report ground-level explosions that totally wrecked the lobby of the Twin Towers?
Problem #4: If the jet fuel weakened the support structures of the Twin Towers, then according to the official pancake theory, why wasn't the steel core left standing? Instead, the steel cores were photographed after the collapse as having been cut diagonally (by thermite, thermite residue found by 9/11 researchers).
Problem #5: If a plane hit the Pentagon, then where is all the debris, including the tail section, fuselage and especially the engine made of titanium which couldnt have been destroyed by the flames? And why was the hole made in the Pentagon not big enough for a jet liner? What hit the Pentagon?
Problem #6: If the government's official story is true, then why did the CIA/FBI confiscated all CCTV cameras around the Pentagon immediately after the crash and refused to release them except for 5 frames, which is inconclusive?
Problem #7: If a plane crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, then again, where is all the debris and human bodies? Shouldnt there be the wreckage? Go check out the photos. In fact, a cornerer said that it wasnt a crime scene because there were no human bodies.
Problem #8: Why did Dick Cheney order NORAD to stand-down when it was known that hijacked planes were in the air?
Problem #9: What a coincidence that more than 6 anti-terrorist exercises were taking place on 9/11 envisioning the same scenario.
Problem #10: Why did the US Govt invade Afghanistan, blaming Bin Laden for 9/11, when 1)war plans for the invasion already existed before 9/11 and 2)the FBI does not list Bin Laden as responsible for 9/11 because of lack of evidence.
So, given all these inconsistencies, the official story just doesnt stand. It is more likely that it was another false-flag operation carried out by the CIA/MI6/Mossad or a combination, to set into motion global change, which we have experienced.
You mean conspiracy theory? No. I'm talking about conspiracy fact. Before you switch off because you associate belief in conspiracies with mental instability, perhaps you might want to ponder those 10 problems with the official story.
-
Before you switch off because you associate belief in conspiracies with mental instability, perhaps you might want to ponder those 10 problems with the official story.
Your views on history and politics is greatly influenced and shaped by internet conspiracy propagandists, this is a bad thing, not good thing.
-
Originally posted by freedomclub:
You mean conspiracy theory? No. I'm talking about conspiracy fact. Before you switch off because you associate belief in conspiracies with mental instability, perhaps you might want to ponder those 10 problems with the official story.
Same reply for you.