The War In Iraq Is Over!

Come on man... those towers fell in about 11 seconds.. thats pretty much freefall

 

911 chat goes around in circles.

Why?

Because there is just no way of nailing a 'truth' that is going to suit everyone.

And let's be honest - IF there was some element of this being an 'inside job', those that were culpable are going to ensure that this never comes out, at least not in the shape of a formal admission!

Can you imagine what would happen?

When I look at 911, I ask..

Does it seem v plausible that the most technology advanced and best defended nation on the planet, can be hit by a small group of men, and a leader who amounts to little more than a Islamic preacher and cleric?

Are there people, Americans(and even non Americans), who would be truly evil enough to oversee the death of 3000 of their 'own' people, if it furthered their aims?

Would these people have the means to do it, and put the blame on another?

Would they have the means AND the motive?

 

I would. The BBC and CNN are controlled by the same powers that run Fox.

The clever part of mindF&&&&g the west is that they have the extreme nonsense and racism and insanity of Fox and then the apparently much more reasoned and considered and sane broadcasts from the BBC and CNN.

The reality is that they are all telling the same lies.

People are more likely to seek truth from apparently moderate news agencies like the CNN and BBC ...however they are all telling the MIC story.

 

Of course 9-11 was an inside job. It is absolutely unquestionable.

How anyone can think differently .. simply baffles me.

First year of the neocon regime .. they amazingly get this free licence to go to war with a shadowy, undefinable enemy. This means they can go to war anywhere.

How any American can believe that the Pentagon had no way of defending itself... that alone is beyond me.

NORAD stand down is another red flag. The fact that NOT one person was sacked for the failure to defend America that day.

The propaganda against an imaginary cave dweller was in full motion.. minutes after the buildings collapsed at free fall speed.

There was never any trial or public investigation. It was just stated as an accepted FACT that a bearded caveman did this... no evidence has ever been offered.

For 8 long years ..Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice etc... uttered no other word or talked about no other subject.... other than TERRORISM. They brainwashed the American public into fearing and hating an imaginary enemy. No more attacks were necessary. More and more people are doubting it however.. and so I expect a new false flag in the coming months and years.... no doubt with Iranian fingerprints this time.

 

The answer to all of these is a resounding yes.

The same people sacrificed 5000 servicemen in a war of LIES in Iraq..killing 10,000s of innocent Iraqis in the process.

The same people were behind the Gulf of Tonkin LIE that got the US into Vietnam... killing 50,000 US servicemen and MILLIONS of Vietnamese, Cambodians, Laotians.

The US is run by the Military complex. On 9-11 .. the three WTC buildings were taken apart by military nano thermite... The Pentagon was allowed to be hit ..but only in the accounts section... and NORAD was stood down. The bogeyman bin laden was already in place to blame for all of this. Seeing as most Americans are too busy eating and getting on with their mundane lives...most will just go along with the show.

 

Do I really have to list out all of the terror incidents from Islamic radicals that we've had?

Who do you think?

 

Yes I would like to see that.

However I want only the list of attacks by Islamic radicals in Western nations.. as that is what we were told to fear and hate.

I can list 911, the wtc 1993 (both inside jobs).
London 7/7 (inside job)
and Madrid (inside job).

So that is 4 supposed attacks in 100 years. All of which were actually inside jobs.

Considering the massive crimes against humanity that we have committed in the middle east over the past 2 decades... i am amazed that there have been NO islamic terrorist attacks in the US or Europe.


Now considering that we were told that there is a dangerous and large terrorist organisation that HATES america and western freedom loving ways.... it is amazing that there have not been 1000s of terrorist attacks. Don't you think? not FOUR in 100 years?

 

If you believe all of those are inside jobs, then I really have nothing left to say to you. You've made it plainly obvious that you're impossible to reason with.

 

Ok let us assume that they were not (even when the evidence points to the fact that they were).

Please explain why there have been 4 attacks in all the western nations in the past 100 years?

After all .. they HATE us soooo much.

 

Let me clarify something here, Tsar Richard. I don't buy into the idea that invading countries is going to get rid of terrorism.

However, I also don't buy into the conspiracy theories you do.

The way I see it, a very small group of Muslims are nutjobs who occasionally attack us or plot to do so. More often than not, we foil their plans, because thankfully, most of them are terrible at bombmaking.

Terrorists do exist, whether it's radical Islamists or radical Christians or radical something else.....

 

I wish I could live in your fairytale world. Must be exciting?

 

Post a link .. That was not what I found when I looked it up but I really do not care.

It do not think it is in America's best interest for extremists who want theocracy to be in power.

The Saudi's are a minority as well .. do you suggest we invade them next ?

 

I dont know enough about Al Jazeera to comment but Fox is definately not the BBC.

Fox and the National Enquirer are on roughly equal footing as far as Im concerned.

 

War is hell and while heroes abound in all wars, war itself is nothing to be admired. Its a sad, sad thing. That said I must disagree with your assessment. The snakes head has been severed however like a hydra it will grow back, but that takes time. Time will tell if the hydra is stronger or weaker than the original beast. We have suffered no 9/11 style attacks ...yet. I am sure at least the sane terrorists (sane ones are fighting for a rational and reasonable goal) will think twice before attacking the USA for they know that a great slaughter of their friends loved ones and self will be forthcoming. If I were president the message to terrorists would be; READ MY LIPS, ANY TERROR ATTACKS WILL BE SEEN AS AN ACT OF WAR AND IF THERE IS A NEXT TIME THE FULL MIGHT OF THE USA MILITARY WILL BE BROUGHT OUT TO BEAR INCLUDING IF NECESSARY THE NUCLEAR OPTION*.

*Of course the nuclear option would be reserved for like attacks, ie NBC style attacks against our country.

Rev A

 

I only agree that the war profiteers profited. I think the primary reason we invaded was to destabilize the Middle east (not to make the region more stable as reported to we peons) and make Iraq tow the oil and the strategic (pipe?) line for the west. The military also were sharpening their claws and training the troops for desert warfare conditions as well as testing the equipment for far more apocalyptic adventures in the ME. That kind of battle experience is invaluable to a military force. The actual event of war in the Middle east, may well be the water breaking, and the beginning of the birth pangs *.

I am fairly confident the hornets nest of emerging military activities that range from Iran’s flirting with A bomb development to the various recent wars, (the 67 war and other worldwide) seem to be pulling the world to Megiddo’s** and the beasts death embrace. Who is the beast? He has had many names ; the Assyrian *** the little horn, the old one, the Antichrist etc. They all represent IMO the last world leader who has a supernatural second in command aka the false prophet. I hope none of the above is the case! Only God knows the day and the hour of the end times, so I do not say I know anything for sure. It is scary though when bible prophesy falls in lock step with world events.

* http://bible.cc/mark/13-8.htm

Rev A

 

The irony here is astonishing!

 

Excerpt>>>>

<<<<<<<Excerpt

I do not see the problem. The explosive power of a 875000 pound jet going 300-500 mph full of jet fuel is horrifying. The towers were not defended meaning there were no stealth jets etc flying holding patterns over even the pentagon. Those attacks were not that difficult IMO. It was very doable by nearly anyone with money and a will to do it. I could list equally as bad scenarios that anyone could do if they wanted. And much, much more deadly than the (9/11 events).

In any case I do not mind a health dose of skepticism. I detest in the box thinkers, and rarely the conspiracy theorists win one., which is a good thing! One of my favorite movies is the Mel Punch drunk Gibson in ‘Conspiracy Theory‘. A conspiracy theory I think was true was the assassination of JFK, Robert Kennedy, and Sir hand job. It screamed ASSASSINATIONS!!! IMO. Another was when frank olsen jumped *cof* yeah jumped to his death after he was shoved out of a 13th floor window! The CIA did it for sure. But the 9/11 thing? Nah it was too easy to do. The same thing could be accomplished with a fleet of Lear jets and high explosives IMO.

http://www.unsolved.com/ajaxfiles/une_frank_olson.htm


Rev A

 

Like I say, I am open minded to the 911 thing.

Who is Larry Silverstein?

Did his group purchase these building six months prior to the attacks?

Did the towers required some $200 million in renovations and improvements, most of which related to removal and replacement of building materials declared to be health hazards in the years since the towers were built.?

Did Silverstein file TWO insurance claims for the maximum amount of the policy, based on the two, in Silverstein's view, separate attacks?

 

Am I to take it 'MIC' = 'Men In Control'?

Anyway, what news sources do you prefer?

 

Bit in bold - see, that is also my measure.

Would they have the means? Yes they would.

Woud they have a motive? Yes they would.

Would they be insane enough? I believe that they are.

Motive + means, it would usually be the basis for a criminal investigation, wouldnt it?

But here is the problem - who would ever DO the investigating? Is there a power even big enough to do so?

And an open question to ALL Americans.

What would you personally do if it ever did come to light that this was an inside job, and that you had been lied to, all along?

Perhaps, in our search for answers, we could look to history..

The Reichstag Fire


The 1933 Reichstag Fire was a key event in Adolf Hitler's ascendancy to power. During the night of February 27th, the Reichstag Building, which housed the German Parliament, was gutted by a massive fire. Adolf Hitler, who had become President Paul von Hindenburg's chancellor less than a month earlier, pressured von Hindenburg to give him essentially dictatorial powers. Hitler used the attack to roll back the legal guarantees of personal liberty enshrined in the constitution.

Marinus van der Lubbe, a Dutch Communist who had been protesting against Hitler's new government, was picked up on the night of the fire and charged, along with four other Communists, with setting the fires. Van der Lubbe was executed on January 10th, 1934, while the other defendants were acquitted.

Most historians think that Hitler had the fire set, while finding a scapegoat in the impoverished Dutchman, van der Lubbe.


The whole truth about the Reichstag fire will probably never be known. Nearly all those who knew it are now dead, most of them slain by Hitler in the months that followed. Even at Nuremberg the mystery could not be entirely unraveled, though there is enough evidence to establish beyondi a reasonable doubt that it was the Nazis who planned the arson and carried it out for their own political ends.

From Goering’s Reighstag’s Presidents Palace an underground passage, built to carry the central heating system, ran to the Riechstag building. Through this tunnel Karl Ernst, a former bellhop who had become the Berlin S.A. leader, led a small detachment of storm troopers on the night of February 27 to the Riechstag where they scattered gasoline and self-igniting chemicals and then made their way quickly back to the palace the way they had come. At the same time, a half-witted Dutch communist with a passion for arson, Marinus van der Lubbe, had made his way into the huge, darkened and to him unfamiliar building and had set some small fires of his own. The feeble-minded pyromaniac was a godsend to the Nazis. He had been picked up by the S.A. a few days before after having been overheard in a bar boasting that he had attempted to set fire to several buildings and that he was going to try the Riechstag next. The coincidence that the Nazis had found a demented Communist arsonist who was out to do exactly what they themselves had determined to do seems incredible but is nevertheless supported by the evidence ...

...

On the day following the fire, February 28, [Hitler] prevailed on President Hindenburg to sign a decree “for the Protection of the People and the State” suspending seven sections of the constitution which guaranteed individual and civil liberties. Described as a “defensive measure against Communist acts of violence endangering the state, the decree laid down that:

Restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press, on the rights of assembly and association; and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic and phone communications; and warrants for house searchers, orders for confiscations, as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.

In addition, the decree authorized the Reich government to take over complete power in the federal states when necessary and imposed the death sentence for a number of crimes, including “serious disturbances of the peace” by armed persons.

Thus with one stroke Hitler was able not only to legally gag his opponents and arrest them at his will but, by making the trumped-up Communist threat "official," as it were, to throw millions of the middle class and the peasantry into a frenzy of fear that unless they voted for National Socialism at the elections a week hence, the Bolsheviks might take over. Some four thousand Communist officials and a great many Social Democrat and liberal leaders were arrested, including members of the Reichstag, who, according to the law, were immune from arrest. This was the first experience Germans had had with Nazi terror backed up by the government.


http://911review.com/precedent/century/reichstag.html

 

Yeah for some bizarre reason.. the country that supposedly provided 95% of the 9-11 hijackers..and is the most brutal dictatorship in the world... is a friend.

However Iran ... no terrorists or hijackers... is evil.

 

Fox and BBC are the same.

Fox is just used as a joke extremist .. to make people think that the BBC and CNN are reasoned and trustworthy.

The reality is that ALL spread lies and propaganda on a daily basis.

 

You still have yet to comment on the official fairytale of New york.. the 9-11 commission report.

You are very aggressive vs those who know that 9-11 was an inside job..however you have failed to respond to 10 requests for your opinion about the official story..which has ZERO evidence to back it up.

As an evidence obsesse...surely you must have problems with this official story about imaginary islamic terrorist groups and bearded bogeymen?

 

No .. Military Industrial Complex.. however it is essentially the same thing.

I don't trust ANY news sources. I look at what happens and come up with my own conclusions.

I expected a false flag attack once the neocons got into power. I did not have to wait long.

The trillion dollar invasions alone prove that 9-11 was an inside job....their constant talk about terrorism and invented bogeymen like bin laden confirm it.

 

Who are these people who 'know' that 9/11 was the inside job you're so convinced of? Do they get abducted by aliens as well? Are they also adherents of the Global Government conspiracy theory-along with all the associated 'proof'?

As for being obsessed with evidence-I have yet to see anything from you which doesn't stem from what you believe happened. The 9/11 Commission Report? Not really relevant until you, the accuser, come up with solid, irrefutable and factual evidence in support of your accusation. 'I believe' is not proof, and you have furnished nothing else but your opinion.
The defense rests...