Pages: 1 2 3

 

2007-06-02 21:38:42
CommieChipmunk
Member
+488|7016|Portland, OR, USA

Turquoise wrote:

CommieChipmunk wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

9/11 happened because the FBI and CIA did not interact properly with each other.  Hopefully, things have changed since then.
Yeah, just like Pearl Harbor happened because someone high up didn't think it was a credible threat... or, you know, that whole Gulf of Tonkin shindig.

We sure do have a way of conveniently getting ourselves into wars.

The government can get us into wars, but they have to keep us in a state of fear to make sure they don't lose all support for them.
Hey, I have my suspicions, but I just can't bring myself to say that the government allowed 9/11 to occur.

I think it's more of a case of exploiting fear in the aftermath.

There's no question that the Bush administration was looking for a reason to invade Iraq even before 9/11 (and even the Democrats were talking about it in the late 90s).  The military industrial complex holds an immense amount of power over our government to the extent that it reaches both parties -- it's just that the Republicans are the warmongers this time around.  The Democrats were the ones back during JFK's administration.
I agree... but I wouldn't put it beyond them, this group is certainly capable of such a thing.

And it's not like we haven't seen worse.  Look at JFK for instance, there's no way that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman.. there's absolutely no way, even if the conditions were absolutely perfect...

...They got away with that.
2007-06-02 21:47:36
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6851|North Carolina

CommieChipmunk wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

CommieChipmunk wrote:


Yeah, just like Pearl Harbor happened because someone high up didn't think it was a credible threat... or, you know, that whole Gulf of Tonkin shindig.

We sure do have a way of conveniently getting ourselves into wars.

The government can get us into wars, but they have to keep us in a state of fear to make sure they don't lose all support for them.
Hey, I have my suspicions, but I just can't bring myself to say that the government allowed 9/11 to occur.

I think it's more of a case of exploiting fear in the aftermath.

There's no question that the Bush administration was looking for a reason to invade Iraq even before 9/11 (and even the Democrats were talking about it in the late 90s).  The military industrial complex holds an immense amount of power over our government to the extent that it reaches both parties -- it's just that the Republicans are the warmongers this time around.  The Democrats were the ones back during JFK's administration.
I agree... but I wouldn't put it beyond them, this group is certainly capable of such a thing.

And it's not like we haven't seen worse.  Look at JFK for instance, there's no way that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman.. there's absolutely no way, even if the conditions were absolutely perfect...

...They got away with that.
The more I research the JFK assassination, the more I feel it has something to do with Cubans.  I think it might have been retribution for leaving the counter-revolutionaries stranded.  What makes me wonder is why they would keep the evidence still sealed from the public all these years.  I think maybe the Cuban mob made a back room deal with some powerful people.
2007-06-02 22:07:58
imortal
Member
+240|7111|Austin, TX

CameronPoe wrote:

imortal wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Wow. You're beginning to sound like one of those 9/11 conspiracists ATG. Time for a reality check - no offence. No middle eastern state wants to destroy America and they all realise that they couldn't even if they did want to. You need to apply logic and reason here. It should be unbelievably easy to prevent a nuclear terrorist attack on the US anyway. What are they gonna do? Carry it into the country in leaden overalls?
No, actually, they really, really do think they should and can destroy the US.  After all, they destroyed the Soviets, right?  And they hav Allah on their side.

Not saying ALL muslims believe this.  Just some of them.

Also, not all christians thnk abortion is wrong.  But the real wackos that blow up the clinics do sure do make up for the rest of them, no?
Some facts:

- Iran doesn't want to destroy the US, they just want the US to stop trying to fuck them over and to stop fucking around their patch/neighbourhood. They respond rather than aggress.

- Saudi Arabia doesn't want to destroy the US, they are content selling shitloads of oil to the US and investing heavily in US business.

- Iraq is currently incapacitated as a nation, puppet government in place.

- Syria doesn't want to destroy the US, they just want the US to stop siding with Israel all the time - a country currently illegally occupying part of Syria, the Golan Heights.

- Lebanon has enough problems of its own.

- Libya is all buddy-buddy with the US now since the US allowed them back in from the cold after their announcement concerning abandoned weapons-programs.

- Jordan practically sucks US cock.

- Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan is a US stooge, ready to do whatever the US says.

- Afghanistan is currently incapacitated as a nation, puppet government in place.

- Somalia is the only nation on earth without a government.

- Sudan has enough problems of its own.

- Egypt can't get enough of that lovely US aid.

- The UAE, Bahrain, Oman, Kuwait and Qatar all love US capital and are fashioning themselves into middle eastern business hubs for the west.

- Yemen is militarily capable of approximately nothing.

The bases are covered, by and large, in terms of a large scale organised enemy. Al Qaeda can merely bite at the heels of the US homeland at best: especially if border security is addressed properly.
I do not recall mentioning a country, mearly that some muslims actually believe it and actively want to destroy America and our way of life.  Any conflict that occurs will most likely not be a political one, between nations, but an ideological one, between ideas; those are much more messy.

I can understand your statements and summaries of each of the middle eastern countries.  However, this is your opinion on them, and calling them facts does not make them so.

Iran's government has taken an exremely hard line against Isreal, and brings the US into it by proxy.

Hamas is trying to run Lebanon, and has been very buddy buddy with Iran, who is providing military aid and training.  Iran is also supplying military training and equipment to people fighting in Iraq.

The Taliban are making inroads into retaking portions of Afghanastan and reestablishing power.

You overlook that one of the things all of these countries to is provide manpower.  The birthrate in Islamic countries is almost unbelievable to western countries.  Thay have lots of people to throw away in conflicts like these.  Also, they do not strictly follow governments.  They group around leaders, religious and militant.
2007-06-02 22:12:24
imortal
Member
+240|7111|Austin, TX

CommieChipmunk wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

CommieChipmunk wrote:


Yeah, just like Pearl Harbor happened because someone high up didn't think it was a credible threat... or, you know, that whole Gulf of Tonkin shindig.

We sure do have a way of conveniently getting ourselves into wars.

The government can get us into wars, but they have to keep us in a state of fear to make sure they don't lose all support for them.
Hey, I have my suspicions, but I just can't bring myself to say that the government allowed 9/11 to occur.

I think it's more of a case of exploiting fear in the aftermath.

There's no question that the Bush administration was looking for a reason to invade Iraq even before 9/11 (and even the Democrats were talking about it in the late 90s).  The military industrial complex holds an immense amount of power over our government to the extent that it reaches both parties -- it's just that the Republicans are the warmongers this time around.  The Democrats were the ones back during JFK's administration.
I agree... but I wouldn't put it beyond them, this group is certainly capable of such a thing.

And it's not like we haven't seen worse.  Look at JFK for instance, there's no way that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman.. there's absolutely no way, even if the conditions were absolutely perfect...

...They got away with that.
Wow.  People still really go on about the Kennedy thing?  Do you think the moon landings were faked too?  Do you know where Hoffa is buried?

Apart from that, most disasters on this scale happen precisely because not one or two things went wrong, but when a freak alignment of multiple mistakes and errors were made, all leading up to the event which could have been prevented at any one step.  It also seems, to people looking back with hindsight, that such clues and steps were obvious (NOW) and that something sinister must have happened to have the system break down so fully.  It goes against human nature to accept that it basically comes down to a freakish set of circumstances.
2007-06-02 22:15:13
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6851|North Carolina

imortal wrote:

Iran's government has taken an exremely hard line against Isreal, and brings the US into it by proxy.
AIPAC and PNAC bring us into that conflict, not any legitimate concern about Iran.  Israel is an unnecessary liability to our foreign relations, but we will continue to support them since there are many powerful Zionists that influence our government.
2007-06-02 22:17:50
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6851|North Carolina

imortal wrote:

CommieChipmunk wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


Hey, I have my suspicions, but I just can't bring myself to say that the government allowed 9/11 to occur.

I think it's more of a case of exploiting fear in the aftermath.

There's no question that the Bush administration was looking for a reason to invade Iraq even before 9/11 (and even the Democrats were talking about it in the late 90s).  The military industrial complex holds an immense amount of power over our government to the extent that it reaches both parties -- it's just that the Republicans are the warmongers this time around.  The Democrats were the ones back during JFK's administration.
I agree... but I wouldn't put it beyond them, this group is certainly capable of such a thing.

And it's not like we haven't seen worse.  Look at JFK for instance, there's no way that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman.. there's absolutely no way, even if the conditions were absolutely perfect...

...They got away with that.
Wow.  People still really go on about the Kennedy thing?  Do you think the moon landings were faked too?  Do you know where Hoffa is buried?

Apart from that, most disasters on this scale happen precisely because not one or two things went wrong, but when a freak alignment of multiple mistakes and errors were made, all leading up to the event which could have been prevented at any one step.  It also seems, to people looking back with hindsight, that such clues and steps were obvious (NOW) and that something sinister must have happened to have the system break down so fully.  It goes against human nature to accept that it basically comes down to a freakish set of circumstances.
The only thing that refutes the "freakish set of circumstances" is how the government is still so secretive about the information surrounding the event.  Over the last 40 years, there are still elements of this investigation that the government will not disclose.  That certainly makes it look suspicious.
2007-06-02 22:19:08
CommieChipmunk
Member
+488|7016|Portland, OR, USA
I've heard it was the Cubans too.. Certainly more logical than Oswald...

But it baffles me how every time I bring up JFK, people will always defend the government... no matter how much the evidence stacks up.  I assure you, a bullet cannot defy the laws of physics.

That being said... I think Oswald probably had a better chance at shooting the "magic bullet" than al-qaida does smuggling and detonating 7 nukes inside of America..

Turquoise wrote:

The only thing that refutes the "freakish set of circumstances" is how the government is still so secretive about the information surrounding the event.  Over the last 40 years, there are still elements of this investigation that the government will not disclose.  That certainly makes it look suspicious.
Coming up in the next 20? years they're supposed to declassify everything; because the public will be "ready" for the truth at that point.  Of course they've cleaned up and refurbished the limo (a key piece of evidence) and probably messed with other stuff too.. so I doubt we'll be able to gain anything more when we "see it all".  But according to some people, the media is supposedly going to start subtly bad-mouthing JFK over the next couple years to make it look like he was a horrible person -- involved with communism and other stuff like that.  It'll certainly be interesting to see what happens.

Last edited by CommieChipmunk (2007-06-02 22:22:24)

2007-06-02 22:22:06
imortal
Member
+240|7111|Austin, TX

Turquoise wrote:

imortal wrote:

Iran's government has taken an exremely hard line against Isreal, and brings the US into it by proxy.
AIPAC and PNAC bring us into that conflict, not any legitimate concern about Iran.  Israel is an unnecessary liability to our foreign relations, but we will continue to support them since there are many powerful Zionists that influence our government.
Wow.  Like they are the only people with "influence" in American politics.  The politics may be convoluted, but Isreal is important.  If, for no other reason than that they can be used as a bulldog in the middle east, always there for the US to stop holding back if they do something wrong.

But to only assume or suggest that we stay in isreal because the jews control our government is... wow.  that is way right-wing paranoia.
2007-06-02 22:23:39
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6851|North Carolina

CommieChipmunk wrote:

I've heard it was the Cubans too.. Certainly more logical than Oswald...

But it baffles me how every time I bring up JFK, people will always defend the government... no matter how much the evidence stacks up.  I assure you, a bullet cannot defy the laws of physics.

That being said... I think Oswald probably had a better chance at shooting the "magic bullet" than al-qaida does smuggling and detonating 7 nukes inside of America..
I know what you mean...  I think Oswald was the shooter, but I think he had some help in other avenues, like info on the timing of JFK's motorcade route.  That's really the hardest part of the event to fathom.  He had to be in the right place at the exact right time to fatally hit JFK with his shot.  That has to involve some sort of help.

I'm guessing Jack Ruby had a hand in this, but I guess we'll never know.
2007-06-02 22:27:43
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6851|North Carolina

imortal wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

imortal wrote:

Iran's government has taken an exremely hard line against Isreal, and brings the US into it by proxy.
AIPAC and PNAC bring us into that conflict, not any legitimate concern about Iran.  Israel is an unnecessary liability to our foreign relations, but we will continue to support them since there are many powerful Zionists that influence our government.
Wow.  Like they are the only people with "influence" in American politics.  The politics may be convoluted, but Isreal is important.  If, for no other reason than that they can be used as a bulldog in the middle east, always there for the US to stop holding back if they do something wrong.

But to only assume or suggest that we stay in isreal because the jews control our government is... wow.  that is way right-wing paranoia.
Are only Jews Zionist?  There are plenty of Christian and non-Jewish Zionists.  Look at PNAC.

It is true that Israel serves well as a proxy for our interests, but as long as we befriend them, we will continue to be seen as an enemy to much of the Islamic World, as we should.

I can assure you we'd be more than a bit angry if some country managed to "occupy" Puerto Rico or Guam.
2007-06-02 22:29:10
imortal
Member
+240|7111|Austin, TX

CommieChipmunk wrote:

I've heard it was the Cubans too.. Certainly more logical than Oswald...

But it baffles me how every time I bring up JFK, people will always defend the government... no matter how much the evidence stacks up.  I assure you, a bullet cannot defy the laws of physics.

That being said... I think Oswald probably had a better chance at shooting the "magic bullet" than al-qaida does smuggling and detonating 7 nukes inside of America..

Turquoise wrote:

The only thing that refutes the "freakish set of circumstances" is how the government is still so secretive about the information surrounding the event.  Over the last 40 years, there are still elements of this investigation that the government will not disclose.  That certainly makes it look suspicious.
Coming up in the next 20? years they're supposed to declassify everything; because the public will be "ready" for the truth at that point.  Of course they've cleaned up and refurbished the limo (a key piece of evidence) and probably messed with other stuff too.. so I doubt we'll be able to gain anything more when we "see it all".  But according to some people, the media is supposedly going to start subtly bad-mouthing JFK over the next couple years to make it look like he was a horrible person -- involved with communism and other stuff like that.  It'll certainly be interesting to see what happens.
I, personally, believe that they keep a lot of it quiet to cover the fact that they bungled a lot and messed up several times following up on it.  Makes the government look a bit foolish.  But I do think Oswald took all the shots.  As to the 'magic bullet,' it is often mystifying how ballistics turn out inside a body, especially when you cannot know the exact body position that he was in at the instant each shot hit him.  That is the kind of thing that haas to be seen to be believed.  yes, bullets actually CAN make a sharp 90 degree turn inside the body for no apparant reason. It is freaky, but it happens.

Also, I am amazed how many people jump to assume that the government or group therein is always up to 'no good' and trying to secretly fool the public, or running its own secret agenda.  I find that this belief is usually fed on circular reasoning, with many false assumptions thrown in about the power, pervasiveness and effectiveness of various branches of the goverment.
2007-06-02 22:31:22
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6851|North Carolina

imortal wrote:

Also, I am amazed how many people jump to assume that the government or group therein is always up to 'no good' and trying to secretly fool the public, or running its own secret agenda.  I find that this belief is usually fed on circular reasoning, with many false assumptions thrown in about the power, pervasiveness and effectiveness of various branches of the goverment.
Do you generally trust the government or distrust it?
2007-06-02 22:33:31
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7047|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

imortal wrote:

Also, I am amazed how many people jump to assume that the government or group therein is always up to 'no good' and trying to secretly fool the public, or running its own secret agenda.  I find that this belief is usually fed on circular reasoning, with many false assumptions thrown in about the power, pervasiveness and effectiveness of various branches of the goverment.
Do you generally trust the government or distrust it?
Unfortunately I think it comes down to who do you trust least. And I do mean unfortunately..ug
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-06-02 22:35:06
CommieChipmunk
Member
+488|7016|Portland, OR, USA

imortal wrote:

CommieChipmunk wrote:

I've heard it was the Cubans too.. Certainly more logical than Oswald...

But it baffles me how every time I bring up JFK, people will always defend the government... no matter how much the evidence stacks up.  I assure you, a bullet cannot defy the laws of physics.

That being said... I think Oswald probably had a better chance at shooting the "magic bullet" than al-qaida does smuggling and detonating 7 nukes inside of America..

Turquoise wrote:

The only thing that refutes the "freakish set of circumstances" is how the government is still so secretive about the information surrounding the event.  Over the last 40 years, there are still elements of this investigation that the government will not disclose.  That certainly makes it look suspicious.
Coming up in the next 20? years they're supposed to declassify everything; because the public will be "ready" for the truth at that point.  Of course they've cleaned up and refurbished the limo (a key piece of evidence) and probably messed with other stuff too.. so I doubt we'll be able to gain anything more when we "see it all".  But according to some people, the media is supposedly going to start subtly bad-mouthing JFK over the next couple years to make it look like he was a horrible person -- involved with communism and other stuff like that.  It'll certainly be interesting to see what happens.
I, personally, believe that they keep a lot of it quiet to cover the fact that they bungled a lot and messed up several times following up on it.  Makes the government look a bit foolish.  But I do think Oswald took all the shots.  As to the 'magic bullet,' it is often mystifying how ballistics turn out inside a body, especially when you cannot know the exact body position that he was in at the instant each shot hit him.  That is the kind of thing that haas to be seen to be believed.  yes, bullets actually CAN make a sharp 90 degree turn inside the body for no apparant reason. It is freaky, but it happens.

Also, I am amazed how many people jump to assume that the government or group therein is always up to 'no good' and trying to secretly fool the public, or running its own secret agenda.  I find that this belief is usually fed on circular reasoning, with many false assumptions thrown in about the power, pervasiveness and effectiveness of various branches of the goverment.
well Jesus, they make it hard not to... They did just about everything wrong.. lol, they obviously even tampered with the Zapruder film (I've never seen such a choppy edit in my life, so many frames are gone). And you don't refurbish a key piece of evidence in any case, so why the hell would you do it in a presidential assassination investigation.  I'd love to believe it was Oswald, but quite frankly, I'm just not that ignorant, I shouldn't have to make up excuses to cover up my government's lies.
2007-06-02 22:37:10
imortal
Member
+240|7111|Austin, TX

Turquoise wrote:

imortal wrote:

Also, I am amazed how many people jump to assume that the government or group therein is always up to 'no good' and trying to secretly fool the public, or running its own secret agenda.  I find that this belief is usually fed on circular reasoning, with many false assumptions thrown in about the power, pervasiveness and effectiveness of various branches of the goverment.
Do you generally trust the government or distrust it?
The government is not a thing that thinks and plans and schemes.  It is a group of people and organizations.  It is not even a single organism.  People also refer to the military that way.  "The Military is out to get me!"  Are there dishonest people in the goverment?  Of course!  Do they hold positions of power?  Most likely.  Do they control areas in secret, having secret agendas that they are willing to protect?  Now I think you are starting to look at hollywood, not washington.

Bed time; my fiance is yelling at me.
2007-06-02 22:40:27
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6851|North Carolina

imortal wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

imortal wrote:

Also, I am amazed how many people jump to assume that the government or group therein is always up to 'no good' and trying to secretly fool the public, or running its own secret agenda.  I find that this belief is usually fed on circular reasoning, with many false assumptions thrown in about the power, pervasiveness and effectiveness of various branches of the goverment.
Do you generally trust the government or distrust it?
The government is not a thing that thinks and plans and schemes.  It is a group of people and organizations.  It is not even a single organism.  People also refer to the military that way.  "The Military is out to get me!"  Are there dishonest people in the goverment?  Of course!  Do they hold positions of power?  Most likely.  Do they control areas in secret, having secret agendas that they are willing to protect?  Now I think you are starting to look at hollywood, not washington.

Bed time; my fiance is yelling at me.
In all honesty, I hope you're right...  I just get the feeling you aren't....

 

Pages: 1 2 3

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard