Dyer on ‘Loose Change’
Gwynne Dyer is awesome. The part I like the best is the way he’s perfectly willing to accept for the sake of argument that either the “small” or “large” version of the 9/11 conspiracy theory is correct — and then proceeds to logically consider the facts of the matter in order to come to his conclusions. Conspiracy theories are not true or false based on the inherent outlandishness of the claim. They’re true or false based on whether they’re true or false, and like Sherlock Holmes, you need to take a scientific approach if you want a chance to arrive at the truth.
Anyway: Film gives life to brain-rotting 9/11 conspiracy theories.
In normal times you wouldn’t waste breath arguing with people who fall for this kind of rubbish, but the makers of “Loose Change” claim that their film has already been seen by over 100 million people, and looking at my e-mail in-tray I believe them. It is a real problem because by linking their fantasies about 9/11 to the Bush administration’s deliberate deception of the American people in order to gain support for the invasion of Iraq they bring discredit on the truth and the nonsense alike.
You almost wonder if they are secretly working for the Bush administration.
March 9th, 2007 at 10:43 am
At least he is honest enough to classify the President’s statements “deceptions” not “lies”. Question; if a man calls another a liar knowing the second man didn’t lie, is the first man a liar?
March 9th, 2007 at 10:53 am
From Webster’s of 1913, in the ‘usage’ section for ‘deception’:
I’m not sure what the distinction is that you’re trying to make between Bush’s “deceptions” and his “lies”, but I guess I’m interested enough to ask. So: What’s the difference?
March 9th, 2007 at 9:25 pm
A lie is the telling of an untruth that you know at the time was an untruth, with malicious intent. That is my definition, I haven’t looked the word up, but I know if I followed that simple definition growing up, I didn’t get beat. As your definition says, deception does not always imply aim or intention. In simplest terms a lie is pretty much black and white, although the results of that lie can have a wide range of ramifications, usually, but not always negative. Deception has every shade of gray and can also have a wide range of ramifications. We add the malicious intent clause to differentiate lies that cause harm from “white lies”.
When Clinton lied in court, the lie itself wasn’t that bad, two consenting adults having sex. This was a lie because Clinton new at the time he said he didn’t have sex with that woman, he indeed had had sex with that woman. No one knew if he was or wasn’t lying until the DNA was checked on the blue dress. Then he said he hadn’t lied, another lie and then he admitted to having an inappropriate sexual relationship, that was deception to cover the obvious lie. So now we have a lie, that lie is not serious, the ramifications to Clinton’s career may have been serious but the ramifications to the public or to justice were not. Remember a lie is a lie, the level harm depends on the specific case. What raised the bar in this case was that it was material in a sexual harassment case. It always amazed me you guys glossed right over that since you are for women’s rights and all.
For the record, I was against bringing charges against Clinton for the sexual harassment. I think sitting presidents should have immunity from civil cases until after they leave office. Let them pay the piper after it is no longer such a distraction to the country.
A lie isn’t always a bad thing, nor is deception. In Operation Overlord, the Allies devised an elaborate deception to trick the Germans into thinking the attack was going to be at Calais, not Normandy. If Eisenhower had called Rommel and said “Erwin, your old friend George is going to attack France at the skinniest part of the channel on July 4 to coincide with our Independence Day” it would have been a lie, and placing Patton and all the other elaborate props there with him would have been a deception, but it would not have been a bad lie or a bad deception. Except from our enemies point of view.
Back to Bush. If he said Hussein had WMD based on the best intelligence available at the time, and the intelligence was wrong, there was no lie. If there was contradictory intelligence and he chose to ignore it, finding the pro WMD intel to more reliable, he didn’t lie. Deciding to go to war with or without WMD proof , as the Downing Street Memo said doesn’t mean he lied, it just means he felt there were enough other reasons to invade with or without WMD. You can disagree with the decision, but that doesn’t mean there was a lie.
Now on to deception. You can deceive without lying, showing a picture of a car you are selling only on the side that was not wrecked for instance. You didn’t say it wasn’t wrecked, but you didn’t say it was either. This would be a harmful and probably illegal deception. If you have information that would help your opponent in a debate, but you purposely don’t give it to him to be used against you, that is a form of deception, albeit on the periphery of the term, but this deception isn’t bad. It is bad for your opponent, but it is not bad for you, and after your (our) interests, everyone else’s comes first.
At this point I haven’t seen any credible evidence this administration lied, and very little that it even deceived. They may not have told every single thing, presidents seldom can. There are national security issues to consider, remember Arabs get CNN too. You also don’t want your enemy to know what you know about them, and the press today, unlike the press in past wars doesn’t hold back information that would be detrimental to this country so you simply can’t give them the information in the first place. He also has political enemies in this country like you guys and all but a couple token Democrats in congress that don’t have the best interests of this country in mind, only their own political ambitions.
I hope this clears things up. I have been trying to add items to the Justification for invasion thread, and they aren’t going through, do the threads stop accepting items after they get so far down the line?
March 9th, 2007 at 9:47 pm
Hm. No, you should be able to post comments there. If you can give me more specifics of what you’re trying to do, and what happens when you do it, I’ll try to figure out what the problem is.
On the Bush/Clinton lying/deception thing, thanks for explaining your point of view. From my perspective, they both lied. And without trying to be snarky, I think your willingness to give Bush truckloads of benefit of the doubt as to his intentions and actions, even at this stage, indicates a fairly strong bias. Which is fine; you can view the world through whatever perceptual filter floats your boat. I just don’t see much point in getting into the details of it with you. You’re clearly capable of maintaining your opinion in the face of contrary evidence; I don’t require further confirmation of that.
I guess I’m suffering from Bush-fatigue.
March 9th, 2007 at 10:40 pm
Hi shcb – appreciate your politeness, I realize that does not come easy for self described right wing rednecks, but it has allowed us thinking liberals to understand the (misinformed) reasoning behind the silly (but dangerous and fearsome) things you right wingers and neo cons say. I really feel sorry that you types have to exist in such a treacherous world view of reality; I just wish you would stop trying to impose that “them A-rabs are out to get us”, or whatever other garbage mentality (“you’re either with us or yer gainst us,” says gwb) on everyone else. On that note, please just support peace.
re: your last post jbc: well said, and more polite than I – so congrats on that front.
As for the topic: As much as I’ve respected Gwyn Dyer in the past, he’s losing me on this one. He’s built a pretty impressive “straw-man” argument here (saying 10,000 people had to be involved if it were a government conspiracy – which is totally NOT the way black-ops are configured) and then he makes the easy argument that that would be impossible to keep silent. Why would a smart guy like Gwynne build such a silly construct, is he really getting that sloppy in his analysis? By the way, most respected 911 truther’s are not saying the kinds of things critics like Gwynne (more commonly Hannity etc.) attribute to them, truthers are mostly saying that the Government’s version of events makes no sense (e.g. defies laws of physics, etc.) I’m starting to suffer from fatigue on this issue too… for some BASIC facts without the crap, see this: http://911scholars.org/
http://911scholars.org/
Cheers.
March 10th, 2007 at 8:58 am
Jbc, thanks for the offer but it was more just me blathering on and on. I had a lot of links in it, maybe they didn’t pass a virus check or something. I know it made it to the server, because on resending I got a message that I had already sent it. I was most concerned that I had left some issues open with Knarly, but he or she (Knarly can you tell me which it is so I know how to address you) has left a post here so I will respond now.
I do have a bias toward Bush, not only because I share basically the same viewpoint, but I also find him credible and decent. But you’re right, I takes a lot more evidence to have someone convince you your brother has done something wrong than a co-worker you don’t like. However, I don’t find ALL Republican elected officials credible or decent. Liking someone is emotional, I liked Bill Clinton, he seemed like a good guy to have a beer with, more likable in that way than Bush. But I didn’t find him credible because of the string of provable lies, even giving him a pass on the improvable ones. And I didn’t find him decent because of his extra marital exploits, credibility in this case is based on logic and truth, decency is based on a combination of personal values and truth.
I know we aren’t going to change the core values of each other here, probably won’t even change the others minds on many issues. I see these exchanges having several purposes; to try and change the minds of others reading these words that are in the middle, and may not have completely made up their minds on an issue. Secondly, having the opportunity to form arguments at your leisure, sitting in your home office, in comfortable clothes, with you favorite adult beverage at hand, rum and coke for me thanks. It comes in handy when at dinner with people of a different philosophy to have already have well thought out ideas practiced in your mind. Most importantly, it allows us to see the other side’s argument on our own terms. No producer or call screener to filter the content and no censor to filter profanity when it is needed for dramatic effect, though it’s use should be exceedingly rare. It is probably too late in this military campaign to change anyone’s mind, we are all so invested. But there will be another, I heard once in the last 4000 years there have only been a little over 250 where there was no major armed conflict occurring somewhere in the world.
We’re all tired of the war, we could end this battle quickly by throwing the entire might of our forces at the conflict, even without resorting to nuclear. It would result in massive civilian loss. Then you would see a massive influx of average citizens into the ranks of the terrorist organizations. Destroying individual homes with smart bombs, killing snipers without destroying an apartment house filled with women and children, handing beany babies, candy, and soccer balls to kids. Building soccer fields and schools, all these things take a lot more time than simply turning a city to rubble, and it goes against my redneck git-er-done mentality, but my rational side tells me it is the proper, though slow and painful way to go. Have patience.
Pray for our troops
Short Haired Country Boy
March 10th, 2007 at 8:59 am
Knarly,
Actually, us rednecks ( in the summer, when I’m on my tractor a lot, I look a bit like Hank Hill, except he’s more handsome) are quite polite, “yes Sir, Ma’am” , “tip your hat to the lady, son” that kind of thing. One of our character traits is we like to needle folks we don’t like or don’t agree with, there is a little bully in all us, that is hard for me to keep bottled up, you should see the sentences and paragraphs I delete after I re-read them. I say with a grin on my face “these guys have been pretty decent to me, they don’t deserve this” and then grudgingly hit the delete key.
This is kind of a make nice letter so I won’t argue who is right or wrong. I would like to address my use of the terms Arabs, Muslims, Islam, Islomofascism, and terrorist. I must admit ignorance into what some of these terms mean, when religion, nationalism and race or at least a subset of a race converge like they do with this group of people I find it hard to distinguish where the lines are drawn, I have the same problem with the Jews. From what I understand, if you are born into a Jewish family, you are a Jew. You can also convert. And Jews have some physical traits that seem to make them a subset of the Caucasian race. Not all to be sure, but enough for the generalization to hold true. I see the same in the Arab, Muslims, Islamic culture, religion, race.
I don’t like to use the word terrorist to describe the group of people I am talking about here. Terror is a tactic used in conflicts, not only war but organized crime, street fights, and corporate boardrooms. The one common denominator in this war, and I’m talking about the world wide war against the western culture, not just Iraq, which I consider a campaign, it is bigger than a battle but doesn’t encompass the whole war, that common denominator is the Islamic religion. From the Philippians, to Russia, the Mid East, Europe and America, the attacks carried out against western countries, targeting innocent civilians, over the last 30 years have mostly be mostly perpetrated by followers of Mohammed. Oklahoma City and the destruction of the lodge at Vail were terrorist acts no doubt, but that doesn’t make non-Muslim attacks a very high percentage. Those modern facts of life may not agree with the definition of the word but neither do the definitions of conservative and liberal.
The group I would like to describe is of course the people carrying out the attacks, but also that population of the Arab world that are sympathetic to the cause. I don’t know what percentage that is, I’ve heard 25-50 percent. I prefer Islomofascist, but it doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue. I don’t want to unintentionally insult anyone or their religion so tell me what term you would like me to use in this forum, I reserve the right to refuse your suggestion, but I’ll be fair.
I watched some of the “who stole my religion” video, it seemed he was more upset with Hollywood than anyone else. Doesn’t he realize they are on his side and work in a world of make believe? Personally, I’d be more pissed off at the folks that stole my religion than the ones trying to return it to me. There was a clip of the differences in men and women showering on the same page, now that was funny.
I read the article on Joshua Key. I’m sorry the military experience didn’t work out for Mr. Key. If he didn’t want to risk going to war, perhaps getting a grant, or a student loan would have been a more appropriate way to fund his education. The mission of the military is to kill people and break things, not provide a hand up for those who are down. I don’t have a lot of sympathy for people who complain the recruiters lied to them, didn’t he ever see Private Benjamin?
After reading the touching story of this young man I did a quick Google search. Now I have lived next door to Oklahoma all my life, lived within two miles of the border for a couple years. I know some “uneducated” folks from Oklahoma, they don’t write books, and go on the lecture circuit. Looking at his itinerary, he’s doing quite well with his new found celebrity status, hope he enjoys it while it lasts, Canada has an extradition agreement with the US now for deserters.
Now this guy may be telling the truth, or he may be lying to garner sympathy to mask his cowardice, I don’t know. I do know reporter after imbedded reporter has commented on the professionalism and compassion of our troops to the Iraqi people. Some of them admitted they went to Iraq with the prejudice that soldiers are as you see them. It seems to me that if one lowly grunt went on mission after mission where the primary task was to terrorize the indigenous peoples, at least one reporter would have noticed the same.
That said, atrocities happen in every war, have since the beginning of time. You’re taking 19 year old men with adrenalin and hormones raging, putting high powered weapons in their hands and sending them to kill people and break things. On occasion the incredible stress will send one over the top. But I dare say no country in the history of the world, with the possible exception of England has done more to mitigate the frequency of these transgressions, or bring the offenders to justice.
Pray for our troops
Short Haired Country Boy
March 11th, 2007 at 1:50 am
Hey shcb,
I agree with some of your points. I live in Canada, support my wife, 2 kids, 4 dogs and a cat that rules the roost… I have held the same challenging desk job for the past 12 years and recently spend my spare time restoring our old 3,000 sq. ft. house back to some of its former glory. I cycle through traffic to work every day, use my 10 year old SUV to take our dogs the 20 minute drive to excercise at a nearby lake or to the ocean after work, unless we walk across the street to a neighborhood park; and, I have cousins in your neck of the woods – Boulder, Colorado.
Canada considers itself Americas friend. Not pro-republican, not pro-Democrat, just a friend. Listen, you’ve lost your way and we would like to help. Here is some information from our public broadcasting corporation that explains America`s involvement in Iraq. I do not agree with all of it, so you might like it. Please do not be put off by the title (The Lies that Led to War) …You can watch it here (unless you are censored):
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/lies/
Yes, Joshua Keyes may be better off here even with the cold than in Kansas or Iraq. I agree that he probably has incentives to exaggerate. Except, you can line up his story with some of the 27,000 maimed US Iraqi veterans who, despite being coerced into silence, still speak out to describe the USA’s aggressive occupation and wanton disregard for civilian life. Then you can’t help but see a bigger, horrible picture. (Unless you watch Fox then you mostly just think about Anna Nicole Smith.)
I really appreciate your `make nice` letter; I am doing my best to reciprocate. The problem is that we are talking about issues where millions of people lives have been horribly impacted on a pack of lies or deceptions or perhaps: criminal intent. Please continue your patience with me if I cannot maintain the same civility. I am less than pleased at your presidents failed ventures.
Yes, war is hell. Thanks to the USA, the former Mesopotamia (Iraq) is now a living hell. For example, millions of people in Baghdad now get electricity a couple hours a day if they are lucky. Sanitation facilities are near non-existent and they’ve been living in those conditions since Bush decided to bomb the crap out of the country and its infrastructure 4 years ago. How would you like to live in an open sewer with millions of people for 4 years? All because your buddy Bush decided Saddam was a bad guy. Or no longer as useful as he was in the 1980’s (when, by the way, the USA provided him with poison gas to kill troublesome Iranians or Kurds.) Way to go USA, put millions of people through living hell to depose a dictator who was put into power by your own CIA operations in the first place. Not to mention that the “depleted” uranium (that means still very radioactive) dust from your country`s ordinance will ensure early deaths and high rates of mutated birth (does American news report these, e.g. Iraqi baby`s now born with external intestines – do you have kids – shcb can you relate to what this would do to your psych) Amerika is now responsible for the untold suffering to take place virtually forever in these desert lands for millions of people – with feelings just like you and me- through radiation poisoning. Except of course, this can`t be so because the Pentagon says that depleted uranium ordinance is safe. Amerika, you are only fooling yourself.
Maybe deposing Saddam is not the official excuse, I can’t keep track of all the lies. It was a WMD threat originally, wasn’t it? No-one who looks at the evidence available in 2003 could credibly believe that it was ever about WMD (except those who are spoon fed by Fox & the rest of the MSM or who WANT to be misled.) Millions of people around the world, who were not spoon fed news from the USA military industrial complex, KNEW the WMD claim was bogus at the time that Amerika was issuing warmongering propoganda to its citizens. Trying to deceive the world with Niger yellowcake, aluminum tubes and all that other crap, still the world`s people did everything we could do to tell the American people that Bush and the warmongering was wrong (huge protest marches everywhere, but that was barely reported in Amerika.) Alas we could not get through to you then. I wonder why I am still trying now. Later, even Michael Moore’s acceptance speech at the Academy Awards, in which he brought ALL the other best documentary nominees onto stage with him in solidarity with his acceptance speech warning that America is living in “fictitious times” and your president is engaging in a “fictitious war.” But MM was jeered and quickly shunned by Amerika`s MSM. Then again maybe the purpose of attacking Iraq was to erase the huge oil deals Iraq was making with Russia and France (now Amerika controls the oil deals), or because Saddam was planning to start an oil bourse in Euro`s in 2003 and dump the US$ … whatever, it doesn`t matter, because it was clear to all except those willing to be deceived that there was no imminent threat to the USA from Saddam. That makes the invasion and occupation of Iraq heinous war crimes. Period. Maybe you Republicans can use a git er done mentality to prosecute those criminals in the Whitehouse for these crimes against humanity.
Anyway, we may never agree but try to realize that I am trying to warn you that you are getting faulty half-baked news from your government and MSM and you, or your leaders, do not having a deep enough understanding about other peoples and cultures. I am not pleased with the death, destruction, poverty that Amerika has inflicted on other peoples and from the polls I`ve seen around the world I am not alone.
To finish up, here are some comments on the points you raised:
Israel is a country, many Jews live there (America is a country, many Christians live there.) Judaism is a religion, Jews believe in it (Christianity is a religion that Christians believe in). There are different kinds of Jews (and there are different kinds of Christians.) Iran is a country, many Muslims live there. There are different kinds of Muslims.
Christians, Jews and Muslims all worship the same God. Details of their prophets vary. God in any of these religions emphasises the sanctity of life, and all things in His creation. Using any religion to justify war is a fraud (even Jihad).
There is no world wide war against the western culture. That is propaganda, mostly from your government. Wake up. If anything, there is a world wide war by Amerika with its military bases spread in hundreds of countries around the world and secret prisons set against anything and anyone who threatens the supremacy of its Corporations. Wait a second, that can`t be right, that would mean the Nazis have taken over the world. Hmm. Anyway, Western culture is flourishing quite well, terrorism is less of a risk than lightning or bee stings. Again, wake up.
Terrorists usually are recruited from peoples who have been brutally oppressed and who do not have any access to legitimate justice. They are marginal. Your government has blown their importance out of all proportion. They are guilty of colluding with the terrorists to create a spectacular fear (the real goal of terrorism) within the gullable American psyche. Mainly this was done by constructing (amazingly within the first few hours of the morning of 9112001) a full blown Arab conspiracy story featuring 19 scary photos of the suspected Arab perpetrators (15 of the 19 were Saudi, why didn’t you bomb that kingdom instead?) That’s truly amazing detective work from a bumbling FBI! You didn`t mention http://www.911scholars.org in your reply. Someday, hopefully we will find the truth.
You say that attacks on civilians have mostly been perpetrated by followers of Mohammed. I would add that followers of Jesus have perpetuated grossly disproportionate responses to those attacks, resulting in tens or 100x or more innocent deaths (excuse me, I meant to say collatoral damage.) I would really like to know the real reasons for the original attacks. If the original attacks were grossly disproportionate responses to an injustice or oppression (violence is no solution), you might agree that was wrong. But a grossly disproportionate response to the original attack is also wrong.
(Also, if I’m not mistaken the attacks in 1995, 1996 1998 and 2000 were on embassies and US military targets, not all civilian but that’s splitting hairs, and they were attributable to bion laden and Saudi funding, so why you are killing Iraqis is moreso a mystery.)
“ISLAMOFASCIST” is the most stupid term ever coined – no wonder Bush likes to use it. Do yourself a favour and get schooled on what is fascism really (here’s the condensed version but do not to get too scared, characteristics of fascism mirror your current corporate government military cooperation closely: http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html Then if you learn about Islam, how it deals with money and cares for the less well off in society, then maybe you will stop parroting your moronic leader.
Glad you watched some of the three minute Who Stole my Religion Video. Although you missed the message if you couldn`t watch the remaining 60 seconds or so. Your loss.
Joshua Key – I too don`t have much sympathy for people who get lied to by recruiters, they should better by their 17th birthday (that their government cannot be trusted.) You may be right too about the mission of a military being mainly to kill people and break things. Amerika spends most of its GDP on that, and spends many times more on that than the rest of the world combined. That tells us where Amerikas priorities in its relations with other countries. Kill people and break things. Nice neighbors I`ve got. (expletive deleted.)
I pray for the people subjugated by your troops, I hear you are lowering standards even further and enlisting more criminals.
Oh, and before your military bastards bomb the hell out of Iran for your viewing pleasure (Shock and Awe on CNN, highlights at eleven) turn on your speakers and consider these people:
http://www.lucasgray.com/video/peacetrain.html
Support Peace.
March 12th, 2007 at 10:52 am
meh.
I’ve watched “Loose Change” and it should be retitled “Screw Loose”
Some of the claims just assume a willing army of diehard conservative nutjobs… wait a second… hmmmm…
Actually I think a much better documentary is “The Power of Nightmares”
The radical Islamists have been ’emboldened’ by the usual Washington stupidity and bluster (as well as an illegal invasion and brutal occupation). As someone who volunteered for the XX in XX, who travelled the world, who fell in love with a Muslim girl in XX (nearly married her, but that is a long story, even by shcb’s prolific prose standards), I have to say that the average American is indeed a clueless sheeple. Radical Islamists hate us for our Israel policy (you know… American bombs shredding Arab children?) and for our clueless meddling in the middle east (imposing the Shah, propping up the corrupt and extremist Saudis, etc etc etc) But they love us for our unique American traits as well: equality, opportunity, wealth, justice, and peace. shcb do you even know a single Muslim? Have you ever reached out and gone to an Islamic center and asked “how can I help stop the hate?”
There are radicals who hate in every nation, every religion, every skyscraper and mud hovel. If you enter into a discussion calling the other side traitors and liars and creatures and the like (hi TV!) then you should expect to be loudly fu’d off stage by the sane people.
I lived in NYC for years. Still have many friends there. A few years before 9/11 my wife (a Canadian btw) and I visited NYC as a last hurrah before the child rearing years began. We arrived and left by way of the Port Authority / World Trade Center complex. As we left, I held my wife under those towers and placed my hand over my unborn son in her belly and said “these are the new cathedrals, the new monuments to science, to reason and the light”
There are radical Christians who advocate genocide of people they just don’t like, just as there are radical nutjob Islamists, Jews and probably Buddhists as well. But the vast majority of humanity just wants the same things: food, shelter, peace, opportunity for their sons and daughters.
shcb, we are all one race, the Human Race. Please stop dividing up people by skin color or whatever other criteria you alluded to above (which all sounded incredibly racist btw).
March 12th, 2007 at 10:57 am
here google! search! now sit… sit… good web2.0 company! good boy!
http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares
the criticisms of the series can be summarized via wikipedia
pretty weak criticisms imho
March 12th, 2007 at 12:03 pm
Loose Change is not alone. There are many respectable people with questions. See 97 of them and their questions at: http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/
Wasn’t it announced lat in the day on Septemtber 10 /01 that $2.4 Trillion was mission from Pentagon accounts? It’s not found yet and future events buried investigation into that, I beleive.
To quote Douglas Hermann:
How to keep everyone quiet, you ask? You heard the old saying, two can keep a secret if one of them is dead? Well a thousand can keep a secret if everyone is happy and everyone is very well paid. You also heard that old saying, honor among thieves? Well why would anyone want to rat on someone else? And even if one person got shitfaced drunk and bragged about bringing down the trade towers, who would believe him. After all, we all saw the hijacked jets crashed into the Trade Towers, right? And then we all saw that fuel fires weakened the steel and brought down those same towers, right?
No one will ever catch us. Who would investigate? Hugo Chavez? We commited the perfect crime and got away with it.
But like I said at the beginning, the crime was obviously a crime to anyone who even glanced at the pictures on the TV. It was so fucking obvious it still makes me laugh. What happened was a classic diversion. The towers fell; two or three ME countries were blamed. A suitable villain was fingered.
But you have hundreds of millions in stolen gold–did Osama steal it? You have those jackpot insurance claims on a pair of architecturel white elephants, leased only months before (giving us enough time to wire them). You have fake pilots that couldn’t fly, doing maneuvers in Boeing jumbo jets that were electronically programmed not to allow pilots to fly that way. You have FBI and CIA head honchos looking the other way. I could go on and on. But isn’t that what your real CSI people should be doing–but aren’t? Isn’t that what your real detectives should be doing–but aren’t?
If a farmer finds his henhouse raided by a fox, he tracks the fox through the snow and discovers the burrow and sees the feathers and the blood. Well, you’ve seen the feathers and the blood all over the people who planned 9-11 but still you can’t seem to put the pieces of this great crime together. Why is that?
from: http://www.rense.com/general73/confess.htm
Other recommended & related works by Hermann here:
http://www.rense.com/Datapages/dhermandat.htm
these are especially good:
http://www.rense.com/general74/illog.htm
http://www.rense.com/general74/aabs.htm (don’t miss the last paragraph)
http://www.rense.com/general69/proofp.htm
March 13th, 2007 at 4:56 am
Hi guys,
Enkidu is right, I talk way too much, it’s a curse, so I’ll try and be more succinct. Sorry, Knarley, I had a half page of pleasantries about my family, and wishing yours well, guess it will have to wait. You guys pepper me with so many accusations and nonsense, I feel I have to respond to every point, this time I’ll just pick two or three at random and smack them out of the ballpark. I’m not dodging any of your issues, if you want me to respond to anything specific just ask.
Enkidu didn’t have much constructive to add, just more telling me how stupid and racist I am and how stupid Bush is, he got better grades than AlGore. My daughter is married to a black kid, no problem, he’s a little quiet, but who can get a word in edgewise with me in the room. A couple of our production workers are from Egypt, nice enough folks, always treat us to exotic foods at pot luck dinners, the girl is a little quiet, the guy likes to give me a hard time and I reciprocate. The town I live in is 40% Hispanic, and 20% Japanese, after the internment by the Roosevelt administration, they had nowhere to go, the democrats had stolen their property and belongings, so they went to work. They farmed and now are some of the richest land owners in the state, in one generation. There has been so much interracial marriage in our little town, I swear, some of the kids look like they are their own race. Everyone works here and most everyone gets along. Don’t lecture me about being a racist, conservatives don’t divide people into groups, we don’t ask for special considerations and we don’t tolerate quotas. We are pragmatic capitalists, we want to work with the most qualified people available. We don’t care what color your skin is, if you can help our team be successful welcome aboard. The racists that hate are the Islamofascists, they want to wipe Israel off the planet because of who they are not what they have done. And they want to cause us to stop supporting the Jews so they can fulfill what the Nazis couldn’t, with your unwitting help. Lennon was right, the American left are “useful idiots”.
About Iraq; more of Iraq has electricity more of the time than at any time during Sadam’s
rule. When he was in power, electricity was available at all times in Baghdad at the expense of other areas of the country sometimes towns would be without power for weeks on end. Now almost every town has power for a period of time, this has resulted in Baghdad being lit about 70% of the time. Power is more than a convenience. It is needed to run pumps to fill the town’s water supply and such, a few hours a day fills that need, helping reduce disease. The reason the utilities haven’t been restored to prewar levels is because THE ISLAMOFASCISTS KEEP BLOWING THEM UP. Gawd you people are infuriating. You look at the good guys and see bad, you ignore the bad guys and side with the European cowards. They couldn’t even handle a third rate hood like Milosivich without help.
Disproportionate responses to those attacks. Hmm, so if a guy is shooting at you with an old bolt action rifle without a front sight and you have an M4, you should drop your carbine, take out your Colt 1911 of about the same vintage and do battle? This is war, there is no disproportionate anything, you kill your enemy with whatever means are at your disposal while putting yourself in as little risk as possible.
Don’t be a fool and die for your country. Let the other sonofabitch die for his.
George S. Patton, (attributed)
US general (1885 – 1945)
“America spends most of it’s GDP on that (military spending), and spends many more times on that than the rest of the world combined”
We’ll take the easy one first. That we spend many more times than the rest of the world. In 1999-2000 the US spent the most on defense by a wide margin. However the top 29 countries below us spent 1.68 times as much combined, with a warning that China’s figures may be way off. No matter, myth busted.
This year, the US will spend 3.9% of GDP on defense even with the war, by comparison Canada usually ranks around 15th or 16th in spending, with 1.2% of GDP going to defense. The liberal government of Canada has promised to raise the current spending of 13 billion to 25 billion over the next five years. If GDP remains the same, that will 2.3%. All this research took about a half hour. I used the 2007 edition of the World Almanac, the official Canadian Military web site, and the Federation of American Scientists site.
Now what do you get for that money. Canada who has a rich and honorable military history, and has always been a faithful ally, has:
3 Iroquois class destroyers
12 Halifax class frigates
12 Patrol ships
4 diesel subs.
A partial list of American Ships and Boats
9 Nimitz class carriers (the big ones) with the George Bush due on line in the next year or two
27 Ticondoroga class cruisers
31 Spruance class destroyers
34 Arliegh Burke class destroyers, the USS Cole is one, the ship the Islamofascists bombed, with 18 more authorized.
29 Perry class frigates
61 Los Angeles fast attack subs
16 Ohio class subs, the boomers
3 Seawolf class boats. The fastest deepest diving subs we have.
I didn’t bother looking up diesel subs since they aren’t worth much in modern warfare except as a training platform. I think we are getting our money’s worth.
The percent of GDP we spend on defense has remained fairly constant since world war two. It peaked during that war at almost 40%. It has remained fairly steady around 4 to 6 percent since, with peaks of around 8 to 10% during the Korean and Viet Nam wars. It went to around 7 percent during the Reagan years and dipped to about 3% after the fall of the Soviet Empire. Myth busted.
The figure you probably saw was that we spend something over 50%. That is the percentage of discretionary funds the military uses. Of government spending, which is about 21% of GDP (that is off the top of my head), well over half of that is non-discretionary, welfare, social security, Medicare, service of the national debt etc.
Your gross exaggeration took 24 words, my well thought out and researched rebuttal took 429.
“A lie can travel half way around the world before truth can put it’s shoes on.”
So let’s recap, you have a website called lies, we’ll give you poetic license on that. When pressured, no lie from this administration can be produced, the lies become “technically not lies, but definitely deception”. I haven’t heard examples of any of these deceptions which are so “well documented” except for WMD, which I can easily debunk with another two or three pages. You worship Michael Moore, the king of creative editing. I’m given a website that defines fascism where the groups name has the word “radical” in the title, a transparent example of working from a predetermined conclusion. Arguments are a lot easier to win if you give yourself the right to redefine words. You give grossly exaggerated, easily researched statistics. You use ridiculous conspiracy theories to prop up your self-serving hatred of this administration and the American way of life. America you may love, it gives you a cushy lifestyle and a protected soap box, but then you bite the hand that feeds you when you trash everything true patriots cherish. “I support the troops, not the mission” what a bunch of crap, your ilk just doesn’t have the guts to spit on them yet, it’s still early in this war. Propping up a future citizen of Leavenworth as a hero, while sadly shaking your head because these fine young men and women are the real terrorists in your mind is just sad. And yet you sympathize with people who have stolen a religion, targeted civilians for death with roadside bombs, beheaded private citizens and journalists “live at nine”, and professed a commitment to our and our friends destruction by what ever means available.
Looks to me it’s forth quarter and ‘ole shcb is a few touchdowns ahead. I’m sure at some point you will claim victory and execute a strategic redeployment to Okinawa, after a furry of really nasty condescending name calling. You keep saying I am being led by a heartless, corrupt administration. I’ve been watching someone being led by the nose ring like a big old show bull, and it’s you.
Pray for our troops
Short Haired Country Boy
March 13th, 2007 at 12:38 pm
Well shcb you just go on believing what you have to believe to keep your conscious from eating your soul.
I will keep working to support peace. If that perspective irritates you and incites you to make silly and childish claims such as that “You worship Michael Moore,” then it is clear who is getting desperate and who is the bully.
Shcb employs typical neo-con tactics of cherry picking points to dispute and then claiming victory based on how he claims to have dealt with those points. (By the way, shcb did not source his figures so they are highly suspect.) As such, I’m not going to be responding to his posts any more – it is clear that his mind is closed and he’s looking to fight rather than to accept a more enlightened world view than can be found on a football field.
Also, sorry to everyone if in my haste some of my details were a bit off but I maintain that the essence of my theme remains true: the USA has grossly overspent on military vs. its education, health, infrastructure, and a zillion other things. Don’t take my word for it, do your own research (just be suspicious of government sources, they are about as reliable as well, a recruiter’s promise to Joshua Keyes) You might start with some independent world rankings for social indicators (e.g. education results.)
As for military spending, here’s a good source:
http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/ArmsTrade/Spending.asp#USMilitarySpending
And here is a cut paste (if the format gets lost then refer to the link):
In Context: U.S. Military Spending Versus Rest of the World
While FY 2008 budget requests for US military spending are known, for most other countries, the most recent data is from 2005 (at time of writing). Using US spending at that time, we can compare US military spending with the rest of the world:
• The US military spending was almost two-fifths of the total.
• The US military spending was almost 7 times larger than the Chinese budget, the second largest spender.
• The US military budget was almost 29 times as large as the combined spending of the six “rogue” states (Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Sudan and Syria) who spent $14.65 billion.
• It was more than the combined spending of the next 14 nations.
• The United States and its close allies accounted for some two thirds to three-quarters of all military spending, depending on who you count as close allies (typically NATO countries, Australia, Canada, Israel, Japan and South Korea)
• The six potential “enemies,” Russia, and China together spent $139 billion, 30% of the U.S. military budget.
Tabulated data is as follows:
Military spending in 2005 ($ Billions, and percent of total)
Source: U.S. Military Spending vs. the World, Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, February 5, 2007
Notes:
• Figures are for latest year available, usually 2005. Expenditures are used in a few cases where official budgets are significantly lower than actual spending.
• * 2004 Figure.
• Source uses FY 2008 for US figure (and includes Iraq and Afghan spending). I have used 2005 to try and keep in line with other countries listed (but I have NOT included the Iraq and Afghan operations cost which would be another $75 billion. Other items as described above are not included either. If they are included, the gulf between US spending and others might be even wider).
• Due to rounding, some percentages may appear as zero.
If you are viewing this table on another site, please see httprg/G://www.globalissues.o eopolitics/ArmsTrade/Spending.asp for further details.
Country
Dollars (billions)
% of total
Rank
United States 420.7
43% 1
China * 62.5
6% 2
Russia * 61.9
6% 3
United Kingdom 51.1
5% 4
Japan 44.7
4% 5
France 41.6
4% 6
Germany 30.2
3% 7
India 22
2% 8
Saudi Arabia 21.3
2% 9
South Korea 20.7
2% 10
Italy 17.2
2% 11
Australia 13.2
1% 12
Brazil 13.1
1% 13
Canada 10.9
1% 14
Turkey 9.8
1% 15
Israel* 9.7
1% 16
Netherlands 9.7
1% 17
Spain 8.8
1% 18
Taiwan 8.3
1% 19
Indonesia* 7.6
1% 20
Myanmar 6.9
1% 21
Ukraine* 6
1% 22
Singapore 5.6
1% 23
Sweden 5.6
1% 24
North Korea* 5.5
1% 25
Poland 5.2
0% 26
Iran 4.9
1% 27
Norway 4.7
0% 28
Greece* 4.5
0% 29
Kuwait 4.3
0% 30
Colombia* 3.9
0% 31
Switzerland 3.8
0% 32
Pakistan 3.7
0% 33
Vietnam 3.5
0% 34
Belgium 3.4
0% 35
Source: U.S. Military Spending vs. the World, Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, February 5, 2007
As for shcb’s world view, it is apparent that he has either been totally suckered by his government or is paid by his government to help shape public opinion. If anyone thinks I am crazy for raising the possibility that SHCB might be a junior spook rather than a simple rancher from Denver, consider this recent article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CAR20070312&articleId=5058
it is based partly on this research:
Accuracy in the Media: Misinformation, Mistakes, and Misleading in American and Other Media / Todd Leventhal, Chief of the Counter-Information Team, U.S. Department of State; Dante Chinni, Senior Associate, Project for Excellence in Journalism (see link at end of the global research article)
Now I’m going outside to enjoy the fresh air, light and beauty that exists in my world. You have a nice day too, shcb, if that is what you want (and if you want to continue your mis-informed tirades you have my sympathy but nothing else.) Logging off, knarlyknight.
March 13th, 2007 at 1:56 pm
SHCB states: “…the Liberal government of Canada plans to increase military spending…”
Hate to break it you, SHCB, but Canada has not had a Liberal government for well over a year. Quite naturally, it is the Conservative Party that wants to increase military spending, at the expense of the social programs that make Canada the great country that it is. Recently however, Canadians have started to pressure the government to take a more aggressive effort to combat global warming and meets its Kyoto obligations, an issue that will be number one in an upcoming election.
Kudos to you though, SHCB, for praising Canada’s military efforts. People tend to forget that we are a vast geographic country of only 30 million people and our military history is quite stellar: we stand tall when attacked, we keep the peace when asked.
That is why Canada is on the front lines commanding Nato forces in Afghanistan, hunting the extremists that attacked our neighbor and friend, America. It also why we stayed the hell away from that fiasco that is now Iraq. Saddam posed zero threat to us or any of our allies.
March 13th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
The last thing I would like to mention is this:
Notice how deftly shcb diverted the discussion of this post about “Dyer on Loose Change” and kept the focus on other topics besides any substantive discussion about physics (3 buildings freefall into own footprint at a freefall speed supposedly from asymmetrical impacts / asymmetrical fires) or other substantive topics relating 911? Again, for many examples see: http://www.911scholars.org
March 13th, 2007 at 3:50 pm
A prior post of mine got lost, I’ll try to recreate it:
Now that readers have had a chance to absorb Global Research’s article on managing public perception, let’s take a look at how the USA manages the public via “Doublethink”. As an example, take the previous postings from a poor prole (who may have lived his entire life in a confused false reality created by his government and who may never even realize his own silliness.) Here are two mutually contradictory statements coming from this prole:
“The mission of the military is to kill people and break things, not provide a hand up for those who are down.” / “professionalism and compassion of our troops to the Iraqi people”
Not convinced? Let’s try a couple more contradictions from this prole on the same topic:
“Support the troops” / “You’re taking 19 year old men with adrenalin and hormones raging, putting high powered weapons in their hands and sending them to kill people and break things.”
“these fine young men and women” / “kill your enemy with whatever means are at your disposal while putting yourself in as little risk as possible”
George Orwell has that prole down cold.
Support peace.
March 13th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
“Agent Sierra, Hotel, Charlie, Bravo reporting Mr. Cheney…. Yes sir things are progressing nicely, one of them has just surrendered…. Yes sir I know how important my needling this handful of liberals is to the war effort, without it the fate of the free world is at stake…thank you sir, and don’t worry I am being extremely careful to not reveal my true identity. SHCB out.”
“Shcb employs typical neo-con tactics of cherry picking points”
Did you read what I wrote? I said I was picking a few points in the interest of brevity, and would be happy to address any other points. I hate to run the score up like this, but you are making it too easy.
Knarley, the numbers I was using for comparing countries were from 1999-2000, I was using current data for the comparison of US and Canada spending. I spot checked a few of the countries, and it looks like your numbers are in line with mine even though they are several years apart, so I agree with your research. Thank you for conceding the point.
I did give my sources, I didn’t give page numbers, but there is only one page in the world almanac that gives a countries GDP, and it’s mentioned in the index. So if my numbers agree with yours, and my numbers are highly suspect……
Personally, I don’t care about using other indicators like education. The first priority of the United States Government is the defense of this country. By the way, in this country, education is primarily a state and local responsibility, I believe federal funds are under 6% of the total cost.
I guess I too stupid to understand the contradiction of my statements, When good people kill bad people, they are honorable in their mission. What the hell is prole, spell check doesn’t like it and neither does my dictionary.
Thanks for the intro to my favorite George Orwell quote;
“To abjure violence is a luxury which a delicate few enjoy only because others stand ready to do violence in their behalf”
Sorry to hear you’re redeploying, Okinawa is nice this time of year.
Pray for our troops
SHCB
March 14th, 2007 at 5:12 am
I finally found out what Proles are, I knew the condescension was coming, you guys are so predictable. And I’m the bigot, shame on you.
The troops need our prayers, you need our distain.
March 14th, 2007 at 7:11 am
Since shcb does not know what a prole is, he has not read Nineteen Eighty Four. His favourite quote from Orwell is even contrary to Orwellian thought. SHVB is using Newspeak to attribute a quote to Orwell that Orwell never made. That is about as ironic as it gets. Again shcb gives no source, but here’s a discussion from Wiki about ORWELL MISQUOTES:
“People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.”
Alternative: “We sleep safely at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would harm us.”
Notes: allegedly said by George Orwell although there is no evidence that Orwell ever wrote or uttered either of these versions of this idea. They do bear some similarity to comments made in an essay that Orwell wrote on Rudyard Kipling, when quoting from one of his poems.
“Yes, making mock o’ uniforms that guard you while you sleep” – Rudyard Kipling (Tommy)
“I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it.” – Jack Nicholson (A Few Good Men)
Alternative: “We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.” – Winston Churchill (miscellaneous quotation, no date)
Here are a few REAL QUOTES (from Nineteen Eighty Four) that might be more enlightening:
“The proles, normally apathetic about the war, were being lashed into one of their periodical frenzies of patriotism.” Part 2, Chapter 5, pg. 150
“the consciousness of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival.” Part 2, Chapter 9, pg. 192
“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth. ‘Who controls the past’ ran the Party slogan, ‘controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.'” — Part 1, Chapter 3, pg. ”
And how’s this for an Orwellian comment about the internet??? “Even the Catholic Church of the Middle Ages was tolerant by modern standards. Part of the reason for this was that in the past no government had the power to keep its citizens under constant surveillance. The invention of print, however, made it easier to manipulate public opinion, and the film and the radio carried the process further. With the development of television, and the technical advance which made it possible to receive and transmit simultaneously on the same instrument, private life came to an end.” Part 2, Chapter 9, pg. 206-7
Regarding Loose Change: “Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.” Part 1, Chapter 7, pg. 84
——-
March 14th, 2007 at 7:12 am
The prole says “The first priority of the United States Government is the defense of this country,” yet he still supports his government after it has failed miserably, according to the “official” (and crazy) conspiracy theory where the government’s security aparatus allowed, through incompetence, for 911 to happen; then, bullied the UN into getting embroiled in Afghanistan just like the failed USSR in the 1980’s and countless countries before that; and, then it committed the ultimate Nuremburg war crime by attacking and occupying Iraq (using depleted uranium weapons!) And at what $ cost?
I’ll stop there but the bottom line is that the prole supports a US Government that has done the opposite of defending America every step of the way, (including screwing up their response to Hurricane Katrina with Blackwater thugs taking away gus from the people before releif was allowed in!) Since this government has been put in charge (by a Republican judge in Florida no less) the once great country and dream of America has now been weakened by almost any measure – potential terrorists being created by the tens of thousands in Iraq and Muslim lands, US deficits through the roof, World opinion of the US is in the sewer, their Bill of Rights is trampled (so I guess the terrorists have already won), and the prospect of nuclear war has been increased by an insane first strike doctrine, it goes on and on. But it’s okay, shcb has a good feeling about his Leader and doesn’t care about looking at indicators of social conditions like education. That about says it all.
—–
The prole resorts to mocking a reference to a website source describing the fascism he lives under because at the mere mention of the word “radical” in the title his mind closes and ceases to debate substance. America, welcome to 1984.
Regarding proles like the shcb: “Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious.” Part 1, Chapter 7, pg. 74
—–
Praying for your troops does not seem to have worked too well so far (check out the VA fiascos.) Why don’t you try a few prayers that your troops don’t kill any more innocent civilians? That might be better received, and less likely to provoke the wrath of humanity’s benevolent God.
Support Peace.
——–
March 14th, 2007 at 7:20 am
Now the knarlyknight posts are coming up, sorry for the duplication… knarly…
March 14th, 2007 at 8:52 am
As should be expected, shcb, we’re in a minority on such an extremist site as this one. I haven’t been posting lately, having grown tired of “responses” that avoid debate by attacking the person, but I visit here daily. We can laugh off the viciousness from the peace crowd, even as they claim “debate” victory, because of the irony.
I’ll be attacked similarly again for saying so, no matter, but you are right on the money in every argument, and I appreciate your thoughtful comments. Allow me to interject a personal microcosmic example of the issue of defense spending. I’ll be as brief as possible.
I was assaulted on my property in June 1995, my face smashed with a log from my own firewood pile when I ventured outdoors to quiet the barking of my two Dalmatians. Passing from the bright light of my motion-detector spotlights into darkness at the corner of the house, I never saw the first blow coming, a piece of firewood swung like a baseball bat. I fought my way out of it, then drove myself to the emergency room. I have another in a continuing series of jaw-reconstruction surgeries next Tuesday.
Last April our entire neighborhood of 5-10 acre lots was wiped out by a class 4 tornado, 1/2 mile wide, staying on the ground for 18 miles. Over the next three days and nights, every home in our neighborhood was ransacked by looters except mine. The property has been well marked since June 1995, and it is quite obvious that I will defend my property by any means necessary “No trespassing. Violators will be shot (and killed, if necessary).” My property is at the end of the sub-division, with no neighbors for a mile to the north (except those in the “Colored Cemetery” 1/4 mile behind the house, of which I am the caretaker). With the main entrance blocked by debris, looters had to enter via the dirt road to that cemetery, passing by my house enroute to the other properties.
I have spent more on home defense than any of my neighbors, and it yielded the desired effect. I still have 40 of the 120 downed trees to clear, and never work in the woods at night without firearms handy. I was an expert marksman in every venture to the firing range while in the military, and I now re-hone that skill regularly. It’s called “peace through strength,” and it works. I am not aggressive, but will defend myself, family and property as necessary.
I apply the same scenario to the more macrocosmic national situation. We were attacked repeatedly, without proper response until the 9/11 events. We have beefed up our security, and yes, it has been expensive, but I’m not concerned with Canadians who are critical of that US spending priority. Those who live in areas where they are constantly bombasted with anti-US sentiment are upset that we ignore their efforts to teach us, while citing goofy conspiracy theories from beyond our borders. Condescension? They criticize the only news channel that is not committed to a gloom and doom approach, but can’t cite a single incident or story that has not been covered by Fox News (I can, however, cite examples to the contrary with the “sky is falling” media outlets). Al Qaeda has volunteered to meet us in battle in Iraq; great, both location and opportunity. On and on and on.
I don’t care what percentage of my taxes are spent on defense; every cent is worth the expense. Much of my tax money is spent on socialist programs I don’t endorse, and those who support those measures can bite the same bullet.
March 14th, 2007 at 8:57 am
Ah, I see that we’re now quoting novels as sources.
March 14th, 2007 at 9:05 am
Another prole (shcb’s boss?) weighs in with sad examples to further turn the topic away from substance. TeacherVet, are you praying for the civilians being subjugated by America’s occupying forces, or are you praying for more of the same murder and mayhem they’ve delivered so far?
Anyone with credentials on this site (such as a PhD in Physics?) who can provide an objective review of http://www.911scholars.org? My opinion based on a fairly high background in science (University Physics courses etc.) tells me the professors at 911scholars.org are right, and they are risking a hell of a lot, and have lost a hell of a lot by not capitulating to “pressure” and coming forth with this information anyway. These scholars seem to support all (almost all?) of what Loose Change illustrates in their video, and they have totally blown out of the water any past rebuttals from these country bumpkin proles.
Support Peace.
http://www.lucasgray.com/video/peacetrain.html
http://www.911scholars.org
http://www.911scholars.org
http://www.911scholars.org
March 14th, 2007 at 9:26 am
Q: “Are you praying for [Iraqi civilians and their safety]?”
A: Yes
I’ve read and studied the referenced propoganda at 911[professors].org. I’ve done the same with the thorough debunking of their stuff (see links provided earlier by schb). We have a choice; and I choose optimism. If that makes me a “prole,” as defined in your other novel reference, (turning the topic away from substance?) I’ll accept it from your viewpoint (outside our borders). The condescention having supplanted any efforts at rationalization, your statements have lost any credibility or validity.
March 14th, 2007 at 10:11 am
TeacherVet, you seem to be employing the same strategy to protect your property as your president has used to try to protect America from further attack.
Instead of trying to figure out why you were attacked (and your neighbours looted) and get to the root of the cause, you try to answer violence with more violence (i.e. gittin out yer gun). It doesn’t make any sense. Kind of like GWB invading Iraq because Al Qaeda members from Saudi Arabia attacked you.
We see how that strategy is paying off for America – constant fear of being attacked and more hated than before. And TeacherVet, you can’t even go out in your own backyard after dark because you are afraid!
Well if that’s how you wish to live your life, that’s your choice.
But I happen to believe that we (as in the global community) can find and correct the root causes of hate towards America, and other western states. Unfortunately, this process cannot begin until after your next federal election. GWB has just caused too much hatred and alienated too many countries.
And as a side note, when you accuse Canadians of being constantly bombarded with anti-Americanism, you are way off. We are not constantly bombarded with anti-Americanism, but we are exposed to, and enjoy, anti-Bushism. There’s a huge difference my friend and neighbour. A huge difference. Take care.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:55 am
and here are some more questions for shcb and tv:
the earth is how many years old approximately?
is the earth flat? if, no, what approximate shape is the earth?
does the sun go around the earth?
is there a magic man in the sky?
did he write a book?
if so, what was the name of this book? (so many to choose from ya know)
do you believe in evolution? (trick question!)
georgie dumbya bush, bad president or worst president ever?
do you know anyone who has sat and worked with dumbya one on one, my pet goat style?
do you know a single muslim?
what have you personally done to reduce our dependence on middle east oil (I walk a great deal more now a days)
bush delusion syndrome, that he is even remotely competent for the job, or actually doing the job?
is it possible for you to admit you were wrong?
lied to?
is it possible for you folks to not hate 60% of America?
March 14th, 2007 at 12:18 pm
enkidu, you are funny. kudos to you. My posts aren’t getting onto this site any more, maybe I’m banned. I’ll pass the torch… cheers dudes, I’ll see you later (in Leavenworth if shcb & TV continue get their way)
March 14th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
NorthernLite: Check what I wrote. Afraid to go into my back yard? Hardly, since I work on clearing the debris almost nightly. I certainly do keep a firearm handy, as much for coyotes as anything (most of them are rabid). I certainly don’t feel unsafe or afraid, knowing that I can handle any situation that might arise – even with a two-legged animal.
I have the same complete void of fear of my homeland being attacked again, so I don’t know the basis of your “constant fear” statement. Btw, Bush and Congress didn’t authorize Saddam’s removal “because al Qaeda members from Saudi Arabia attacked” us. I’m originally from The Netherlands. When I fought in Vietnam, does that mean “the Dutch” were committing the supposed atrocities there?
I appreciate the offer, but why wait until the next election to find and correct the root causes of hate toward the America. As I stated long ago on this site, I questioned my parents in the 1950s as to why most other countries hated us. I welcome the enlightenment.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:41 pm
Isn’t the terror alert perpetually on “Amber”?
You carry a gun. You are scared of something.
I don’t hate you. I hate your warmongering and your ignorance.
————–
TeacherVet, said condescension earlier? Yes, that has occurred after receiving far more of the same from shcb, and worse. Worse is having SHCB issue a veiled threat about being imprisoned at Leavenworth for the crime of free speech. So according to him the principles of his country’s founding fathers should be discarded, yet earlier he refused to consider how this now applies to America:
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html
The reason given for refusing to consider this is that it has “radical” in the title link. Wrong. The word is “ratical”, and it refers to the site “The Ratville Times” that has reprinted some research. The research was first published in the magazine, Free Inquiry.
Here’s a synopsis: Political scientist Dr. Lawrence Britt recently wrote an article about fascism (“Fascism Anyone?,” Free Inquiry, Spring 2003, page 20). Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism. The excerpt is in accordance with the magazine’s policy.
I apologize but it is difficult not to join in with lower level discourse such as condescension when dealing with the kind of prole-like replies which refuse to consider legitimate postings because it might be “radical” (sic).
—————-
March 14th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
Also, such a veiled threat about imprisonment at Leavenworth from shcb is troubling on other levels, including the (very) unlikely possibility that it might not be an idle threat. Alex Jones has compiled many such examples of jack-booted thugs (e.g. Blackwater Contractors) stomping American’s civil rights, and the world community is currently irate at the CIA’s secret prison program filled with secret detainees. These are real events, with real people.
If anyone thinks I am crazy for raising the possibility that SHCB might be a junior spook (and TeacherVet his superior) rather than the simple proles they pretend to be, consider this recent article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CAR20070312&articleId=5058
Also, it seems that they are intentionally writing ignorant but catchy phrases and put-downs in order to appeal to more gullible readers who may be pre-programmed by society to lean towards their comforting statements that reflect their Leader’s position rather than thinking for themselves.
—-
For instance, calling something “goofy” does not make it so.
TeacherVet claims to have reviewed http://www.911scholars.org but, just like shcb, it is obvious that he has done no such thing.
His errors are in plain site: had he really read these sites (or had less of a prole mentality) then he’d have noticed that 911scholars.org has fully decimated ALL of the simplistic sites that shcb provided such as the popular mechanics “article”.
Here is just one such rebuttal… http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/gopm/index.html
If you want to learn more about how the corporate media is supporting the government’s conspiracy theory, look part way down the right hand side of http://www.911scholars.org and read the “Responding to…” sections.
The truth may not be convenient, but whatever the truth may be it is sure to be nothing like this:
Nineteen flight school dropouts, in a complex and well-coordinated heist combining speed and stealth with an uncanny knowledge of our nation’s security systems, commandeered four jumbo jets and flew hundreds of miles before returning to crash the planes into pre-selected targets. A flight school instructor said the men performed badly in the simplest of flight maneuvers in small Cessna airplanes. But local law enforcement officials quickly claimed the 19 hijackers could easily have performed complex maneuvers in much larger and more complex Boeing jumbo jets. Video cameras captured the ringleaders laughing and joking and a charred passport, found at the scene of the crash indicated, beyond any reasonable doubt, the guilt of the men. (From: http://www.rense.com/general74/aabs.htm )
—–
March 14th, 2007 at 2:00 pm
Welcome back, enkidu, and thanks for the opportunity to answer questions. shcb has already answered some of them from his own perspective, and I’ve answered most of them previously. Excuse me in advance for adding capitalization.
Q: The earth is how many years old approximately?
A: At least 4.5 billion, possibly double that.
Q: Is the earth flat?
A: No, making the (b) part of the question moot.
Q: Does the sun go around the earth?
A: No.
Q: Is there a magic man in the sky?
A: No. I don’t know where He is, but He’s not a magician anyway.
Q: Did he write a book?
A: No. Our holy books (of all religions) were written by humans.
Q: Do you believe in evolution?
A: Change over time, yes. Darwin’s theory, no.
Q: Georgie dumbya bush, bad president or worst president ever?
A: Neither; also not the best.
Q: Do you know anyone who has sat and worked with dumbya one on one, “My Pet Goat” style?
A: No, but you can view film of this horrible man committing the sin of reading that book to some elementary school kids.
Q: Do you know a single muslim?
A: Yes, spoke with one about two hours ago.
Q: What have you personally done to reduce our dependence on Middle East oil?
A: Written my congressmen to encourage drilling in Anwar and elsewhere.
Q: Bush delusion syndrome, that he is even remotely competent for the job, or actually doing the job?
A: A non-question, but 52 million voters considered him competent, and yes, he’s doing the job. He’s been forced to fight a determined enemy that seems to want our demise, while simultaneously serving as CiC in two wars.
Q: Is it possible for you to admit you were wrong?
A: Obviously yes, since I’ve done so in conversation with you on this site (to no avail).
Q: Lied to?
A: Yes; with regularity, both in the media and on this site.
Q: Is it possible for you folks to not hate 60% of America?
A: Yes, easily, although I’ve waited months for you to identify the “hate speech” on my part. Do so, and I’ll gladly reciprocate.
The last 3 questions are “right back at ya.” Any more questions?
Knarlyknight: I assure you that you haven’t been banned from this site, and I certainly don’t want you in Leavenworth for voicing an opinion. When/If the Bush gestapo breaks in your door and hauls you away, please have a surviving famiily member let us know and I will personally acknowledge and denounce Bu$hitler as such.
March 14th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
Knarlyknight: Yes, the terror alert is perpetually on “Amber.” We would be stupid to reduce our readiness further. It’s an indicator of preparedness, but certainly not fear.
NorthernLite suggested that I should have analyzed the root causes of assault and looting. I did. They didn’t even know me, or my neighbors. They wanted to steal, but knowledge of that doesn’t protect property. I have the right to bear arms for my own protection, and I exercise that right. Because of fear? You confuse fear with readiness.
I can’t answer on behalf of shcb, and he can certainly speak on his own behalf, but I almost immediately rejected the 14 points of comparison when an initial scan revealed a “patriotism bad, abortion good” stance. The stuff could have been compiled, and the same conclusions reached, by almost any Democrat in Congress. The date (2003) immediately suggested a political motive, and the revealing little “side notes” on many of the “characteristics” reinforced it – leading one to realize they are self-serving, agenda-driven opinions, not facts.
March 14th, 2007 at 2:59 pm
Thanks TV for elevating the debate, such as it is.
Thanks also for your assurance some of my posts are not being banned from the site – sounds like you have knowledge about that. Are you one of the administrators of this site or just looking in from on high?
Thanks also for supporting my right to voice an opinion, and the helpful suggestion to leave a note for my family and friends. I’ll be sure to leave a note with my attorney, although I doubt that’ll do any good considering the success of attorneys trying to help those in Guantanamo Bay prison.
Thanks also for your apparently reasoned explanation about your objections to the fascism piece… Since you don’t like that definition, perhaps you can find another one to share with us on a different thread? Perhaps you can start by indicating whether you think fascism is a bad thing or a good thing. Personally, I think it has so good things going for it, as long as it was to be run by people with conscience. Unfortunately absolute power corrupts. I’d like to see how you rationalize the experience of your country over the past 4 years (media falling lockstep into line with government 911 conspiracy and War Propaganda, Homeland security, Un-Patriot Act suspension of habeus corpus, etc., promotion of torture, concentration of Corporate Power and influence over governemtn officials, sweetheart deals to Halliburton, KBR, etc. that’s just off the top of my head I’m sure others can help you out with that list) … rationalize that with freedom and democracy as opposed to fascism. Bet you slip into Orwellian logic: gotta give up freedom for security! (Security of person is derived from the freedom from oppression, your founding father would remind you. Sorry for putting words in your mouth, just trying to help you avoid the kind of silly mistakes that shcb makes.)
——
Here’s a previously written post that didn’t make it through earlier:
March 14th, 2007 at 3:27 pm
Also, such a veiled threat about imprisonment at Leavenworth from shcb is troubling on other levels, including the (very) unlikely possibility that it might not be an idle threat. Alex Jones and others have compiled from the mainstream media many such examples of jack-booted thugs (e.g. Blackwater Contractors) stomping American’s civil rights, and the world community is currently irate at the CIA’s secret prison program filled with secret detainees. These are real events, with real people.
If anyone thinks I am crazy for raising the possibility that SHCB might be a junior spook (and TeacherVet his superior) rather than the simple proles they pretend to be, consider this recent article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CAR20070312&articleId=5058
Also, it seems that they are intentionally writing ignorant but catchy phrases and put-downs in order to appeal to more gullible readers who may be predisposed by their media biases to lean towards their comforting statements that reflect their Leader’s position rather than thinking for themselves.
—-
For instance, even if
March 14th, 2007 at 3:28 pm
For instance, even if you are sure that Larry King would agree with you, calling something “goofy” does not make it so.
TeacherVet claims to have reviewed http://www.911scholars.org but, just like shcb, it is obvious that he has done no such thing.
His errors are in plain site: had he really read these sites (or had less of a prole mentality) then he’d have noticed that 911scholars.org has fully decimated ALL of the simplistic sites that shcb provided such as the popular mechanics “article”.
Here is just one such rebuttal… http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/gopm/index.html
If you want to learn more about how the corporate media is supporting the government’s conspiracy theory, look part way down the right hand side of http://www.911scholars.org and read the “Responding to…” sections.
The truth may not be convenient, but whatever the truth may be it is sure to be nothing like this:
Nineteen flight school dropouts, in a complex and well-coordinated heist combining speed and stealth with an uncanny knowledge of our nation’s security systems, commandeered four jumbo jets and flew hundreds of miles before returning to crash the planes into pre-selected targets. A flight school instructor said the men performed badly in the simplest of flight maneuvers in small Cessna airplanes. But local law enforcement officials quickly claimed the 19 hijackers could easily have performed complex maneuvers in much larger and more complex Boeing jumbo jets. Video cameras captured the ringleaders laughing and joking and a charred passport, found at the scene of the crash indicated, beyond any reasonable doubt, the guilt of the men. (From: http://www.rense.com/general74/aabs.htm )
—–
TeacherVet agrees to pray for the innocent civilians subjugated by American troops occupying their country (or something similar). Thank you for that. I will pray that all soldiers get home safe and that soon they recognize the error of killing and destruction and in time come to see the divine beauty of forgiveness and peace.
March 14th, 2007 at 5:17 pm
The thing about posts getting on or not getting on is this: There’s some logic on the site that quarantines comments in the “moderation queue” if the person posting them has never had a comment approved, or if the post contains more than 3 (I think) web links. The idea is to keep comment spammers from polluting the site with links to their porn/Viagra/whatever sites.
I try to keep up with the moderation queue, but sometimes (like today, when I was at work), stuff can sit there for a while before I get to it.
I’ve got fairly lax standards about participation in the discussions. It’s very, very rare for me to actually delete a comment.
March 14th, 2007 at 7:28 pm
Thanks jbc, I understand. If I have flooded your queue, I apologize, it’s just that from my end it looks like the post didn’t get through so I submitted it again. Now I know better. Sounds like you’ve got it well managed and a little moderation is a good thing.
—-
Last of the lost post from me, still in response to TV:
TeacherVet chooses optimism, and that is great! The world needs far more of that. If America had shown just a little bit of optimism instead of paranoid fears (okay, 911 was scary, but that was the intention no matter who did it and you Americans fell right into the trap set by the terrorists (be they Arab or PNAC folks) and surrendered to your fear and need for immediate revenge instead of justice then we wouldn’t have the nightmare that is now unfolding in Iraq. Perhaps Americans can now show a little optimism for the sake of the people in Iran? http://www.lucasgray.com/video/peacetrain.html
—-
WTC 1,2 and 7, the biggest crime scenes in American history (that I know of) were swept clean post haste under the highest security imaginable, and that alone stinks to high heaven. http://www.rense.com:80/general74/illog.htm
—
Question authority: http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares
—–
Support Peace.
http://www.peace.ca/
March 15th, 2007 at 12:00 am
TeacherVet mocks me for quoting from Novels. Hey, TeacherVet, Leave Them Kids Alone! References to Orwell and fascism are in vogue today – look at this item just now published by a former “Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review”:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts199.html
March 15th, 2007 at 12:01 am
TV suggests the fascism analogy is wrong, well I’m sure TV has a perfectly reasonable explanation “… why tens of thousands of protestors have poured out onto the streets burning American flags, waving posters of a Hitler-mustachioed Bush…”
Full explanation at: http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_1846.shtml
March 15th, 2007 at 12:03 am
and back to the real topic relating to Gwyn Dyer`s comments, this item supports Loose Change from the perspective of a recent investigation into WTC insurance disputes about the collapsing WTC building number 7:
… the State Department, … posted a response from Silverstein’s spokesperson Dara McQuillan to the “pull it” saga.
The statement read:
… As noted above, when Mr. Silverstein was recounting these events for a television documentary he stated, “I said, you know, we’ve had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is to pull it.” Mr. McQuillan has stated that by “it,” Mr. Silverstein meant the contingent of firefighters remaining in the building.
The insurmountable problem with this explanation of Silverstein’s statement is that there were no firefighters inside WTC 7.
Dr. Shyam Sunder, of the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST), which investigated the collapse of WTC 7, is quoted in Popular Mechanics (9/11: Debunking the Myths, March, 2005) as saying: “There was no firefighting in WTC 7.”
The FEMA report on the collapses, from May, 2002, also says about the WTC 7 collapse: “no manual firefighting operations were taken by FDNY.”
And an article by James Glanz in the New York Times on November 29, 2001 says about WTC 7: “By 11:30 a.m., the fire commander in charge of that area, Assistant Chief Frank Fellini, ordered firefighters away from it for safety reasons.”
Silverstein’s explanation, after two years of stonewalling, that “pull it” meant to withdraw the firefighters is a lie. There were no firefighters in the building for hours before the building’s collapse.
Furthermore, even if he did mean “pull the firefighters” then why did he say “pull it”, with no reference to anything other than the building? Consider also the timing: “they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse.” Could it really be possible that some (nonexistent) fire brigade was removed from the building and just at that moment (“then”) the building collapsed? Is there really any doubt here about what Silverstein meant?
The full story is at:
http://www.infowars.net/articles/march2007/140307Silverstein.htm
March 15th, 2007 at 5:03 am
Wow, this is great, anyone else notice when TeacherVet or I are in a thread the comments go to double digits and when ya’ll are just patting each other in the back they seldom go over a half dozen. The same thing happens on right wing sites by the way.
Teach, welcome to the fray, and thank you for your service in Viet Nam, I was a couple years too young to be involved, and don’t know if I would have had to courage to join if I was the right age. I studied this site before I jumped in and saw some of your posts, it was apparent you were outnumbered about 20 to 1. I figured I would join in, twenty to two is about right, remember we have the guns. That ought to get ‘em goin’.
NorthernLite, you are absolutely correct, I should have put that sentence in quotes, it was a paraphrase of one of the sites I was getting the information from, I don’t remember which, and it is too minor a point to retrace my steps. Please accept my apologies. I also appreciate your countries help in Afghanistan, if the governments and people of our allies don’t approve of our involvement in Iraq and soon to be Iran, but believe in our quest to fight terrorism, I would have a lot of respect for them if they were to take over in places like Afghanistan, Darfur, maybe putting military pressure on Pakistan, it looks like Osama may be hiding there, or just take over the hunt for Osama. that kind of thing. It would free up our boys and maintain your scruples while providing a very useful service. Knarley, you too are correct, I misread the website name, please accept my apologies as well, it doesn’t change my opinion of the piece but I was wrong. There, that should also clear up the question of whether I have ever admitted I was wrong.
Trying to wade through all these posts was a daunting task, but I think if I lump all the references to my/our stupidity and second class citizenship in one reference, it will chop the job down about 90%. I will wear the moniker of prole with pride. Please, please continue to make references to my stupidity as many times and as viciously as possible, you can’t believe how much it helps our cause. Sure it hurts and sure I get angry, but you grit your teeth and take one for the team. One thing I never did when Clinton was president was underestimate his intelligence. Underestimating your foe will lead to your defeat every time. I know Teach is old enough to remember Watergate, I don’t know if the rest of you are, but Sam Irwin was a likable senator from North Carolina with a thick southern draw and a penchant for a down home comparisons, “well, I don’t know what you call it here in the city, but back home we’d get a shovel and a wheel barrow and fertilize the garden with it” that kind of thing. Since he was going after Nixon, the press and the libs loved the man, saying how he was possibly the most intelligent man on the panel, that he was using his down home charm to lull the witness into complacency, and maybe he was. Point is, he was the last redneck the libs have ever thought had more than a mid 50 IQ, and I know atleast a couple of us get into the high 60’s.
Now on to Orwell, I have always heard that quote attributed to George, if he didn’t say it, oh well, I still like the quote. And I haven’t read anything written by Orwell, but this discussion prompted me to read a little about him at lunch today. On Wikipedia, there, that is my reference, I’m not going to leave a link, look it up yourself. It seams that indeed he was quite a lefty, and a firm believer in socialism. He was also quite a man of action, it seems he fought in the Spanish civil war in 1936, Orwell was even shot in the neck, nearly killing him, during a battle. He left the ILP during WW II (he supported the conflict) because he thought they were too pacifistic. So while he was certainly a devoted democratic socialist, I don’t see why this quote would be out of character. Another 10 minutes of research.
I was listening to Randy Rhodes a couple nights in a row on my way home a while back, and on the first night she was saying we should withdraw from Iraq immediately because we had completed all our objectives, the next night she said that Iraq was a total failure. Now I’m just a dumb farm kid from Kansas, but how can both statements be true, maybe you guys with your superior intelligence can enlighten me. That should keep ‘em out of the bars for a few hours Teach.
I haven’t heard of anyone in particular that has had their civil rights trampled on, have you? Sure some folks may have been inconvenienced by being questioned down at the station for a few hours, but it seems the government has pretty much gone after the right people, vigilance is or course prudent when dealing with any government. One last piece of explanation of government spending, of course education, welfare in moderation, road construction, statues built to honor people more important than me, parks, conservation, and research all have a place at the budget table, defense is simply at the head of the table, if the country falls, everything else is academic. Especially since this war is costing a whopping 1% of GDP. Perspective gentlemen, perspective.
I’m working my way down the list. NL, you are right we need to find a way to correct the root cause of this conflict, ultimately it will be capitalism and women’s rights, as I’ve explained previously, we have some new people now so if you would like me to go into more detail ask. In the meantime Teach is right. I don’t care what their problem is when they are trying to kill me. When the dam starts to leak, you don’t fix it properly at first, you pile sandbags in the gap until the rain stops, then you thoughtfully and properly rebuild it. We should and are doing the long term and short term work at the same time, however, some of the long term work can’t begin until the violence is slowed to a certain point.
It’s getting late so I’m going to have finish, Knarly, you need to clean out your ears boy, you don’t read very well, I don’t want to send you to prison for speaking your mind, where did you get that idea, I don’t want to send Mr. Keyes to prison for speaking his mind either, I want him to be a resident of Kansas because he deserted his post, in an all volunteer army. Even with the draft we make concessions for people opposed on moral or religious grounds, there are plenty of jobs in the military behind the lines and even in this country. Or he could have joined the navy if he didn’t want to be a grunt. Many options.
Good to have you Teach, I had them outgunned, but they had me outmanned, I hope your long recovery goes well. I certainly agree with you on self defense, we have 5 German Shepherds that sleep on or next to our bed at night, we don’t even lock our doors. There is also a commando knife under my mattress and a shotgun close. No fear, just confidence. The response time for help to arrive is in the seconds.
We’ll discuss fascism and Katrina tomorrow night unless something better comes up.
Shcb, trole first class (ret) signing off
March 15th, 2007 at 6:29 am
kk, perhaps if you repeat yourself often enough……
You seem to doubt that I’ve read the data on your provided links simply because I don’t buy into the propoganda. You’re wrong, but “buy away” if you wish.
Yes, I doubt the applicability of a novel written almost 60 years ago to any real-life situation in the 21st century. Orwell was a great novelist; period. Douglas Herman is a great novelist; period. They were/are authors, not prophets. I also won’t buy into a comparison of Stephen King’s “The Stand”, any of Shakespeare’s works, or “Chicken Little” with today’s world situation. It might make for interesting study, and certainly pleasurable reading, but would supply no realistic application or revelations.
As for the redundant links to 911scholars: I don’t share your apparent fascination with those professors who chose to self-enhance their credibility by calling themselves scholars. They are professors, and I choose to apply the literal definition: They profess their beliefs, as founded on apparent factual data. I notice that most of the original “might have, could have, may have, possible, etc” language have been replaced with terms of greater certainty in the rebuttals to PM’s theories; interesting indeed.
With no absolute, concrete proof on either “side,” we are provided two contrary options in which to believe: the 911Truth stuff or the “official version” stuff. I choose one, you choose the other. If either is ever proven without question, with no further debunking possibilities, I suspect that each of us is open-minded enough to agree with the conclusion. Until then, we simply have a choice. The conspiracy theories have been largely rejected in the US, while being largely accepted in other places. Fine.
Similarly to the reliance on novelistic citations, I won’t rely on links to agenda-driven media pundits for “proof” of anything. For example, Online Journal’s Mike Whitney, in your provided link, states: “The two men are polar opposites. While the Bush persona depends on a talented public relations team that casts him as a one-part Bible-beating preacher and one-part plain-talking cowpoke, Chavez is unaffected and straightforward. His warm and gregarious manner has earned him friends around the world and strengthened support for his redistributive programs.” His lack of objectivity is blatantly evident, so his credibility as a “reporter” is zero; his support of Chavez-style socialism is rejected, thus his analysis is of no consequence.
You cite references to Orwell and fascism because they are “in vogue today.” That pretty much says it all, and I don’t have an “in vogue” mentality. I don’t care what “everybody else is doing” if I consider it to be wrong. As a kid, if I desired a sharp pain on my backside (and some parental sermonizing) I would use the phrase “But everybody does it!” to justify my inappropriate behavior.
Btw, there was another great “conspiratorial crime” suspected in American history that was never solved. John Wilkes Booth, according to the official account, killed Lincoln, then his remains were found in a burned barn into which he was chased. He was supposedly buried at the Green Mount Cemetery in Baltimore, MD.
Later, according to the Franklin Co., TN Marriage Book, 1:375: John W. Booth was married to Louisa J. Payne, license issued 24 Feb. 1872, wedding the next day. The groom was said to be the most handsome, well-spoken man in the county. Was there a conspiracy within Lincoln’s cabinet? Did John Wilkes Booth get away and start a new life in this county that was the first to succeed when the war began? How could he have possibly had a public life using his own name and be able to escape the notice of the bushwhackers and the Provost Marshall’s men? Either the authorities were convinced that Booth had died in the fire at Richard Garrett’s tobacco barn or it was one of the biggest cover-ups by the United States government every known (until now).
Louisa and John W. lived on the mountain at Sewanee, TN. Booth, an acknowledged ladies’ man, left Louisa and went to Memphis, TN. Their daughter, Laura Ida Elizabeth Booth, was born after John had gone. It is thought that he lived in Texas under the assumed name of John St. Helen and died in 1903 in Enid, OK while using the alias David E. George. American researchers have failed to prove a US government conspiracy, but perhaps outsiders possess more reliable resources. (Presented in jest; I really have no burning desire to solve the conspiracy theory)
March 15th, 2007 at 7:10 am
This is too easy. E.g. There are many examples of rights being trampled upon in America. I’d start with the elections in Ohio with the 10 hour lineups to vote in poor districts vs. short or no line-ups in republican districts (yeah, I know its a state thing – just like education (except Bush’s “no child left behind (a recruiter)” act would suggest otherwise – but that’s part of the point – structural problems like that make the system easy to divide and conquor, and difficult to fix because reform has to take place at so many ppoints that it becomes overly daunting except to all but the Federal government.) Also, your responses show an arrogance akin to the German peoples in 1939 or 40, so cocksure were they about their Nation’s right to dictate to others. Maybe there are so many posts is because so many people are aghast and offended by your arrogance.
Again, your responses are long on opinion and short on substance. Again, you display ignorance with statments like Orwell and Shakespeare are entertaining but have no relevance. The relevance is that human greed and desires have remained quite unevolved over the centuries and eons, the world appears different becaus technology and social / government constructs have grown and morphed. Einstein and Project Manhattan members had similar laments and fears regarding their contribution to giving en-evolved humans A bombs that could destroy the planet.
The difference between the Lincoln conspiracy and 911 is that the official 911 conspiracy of 19 Arabs coordinated by Dr. Evil in Afghanistan is that it requires suspension of laws of physics and ignoring vast amounts of evidence, and ignorance of HUNDREDS of unanswered questions. Here are a few:
We want truthful answers to questions such as:
Why were standard operating procedures for dealing with hijacked airliners not followed that day?
Why were the extensive missile batteries and air defenses reportedly deployed around the Pentagon not activated during the attack?
Why did the Secret Service allow Bush to complete his elementary school visit, apparently unconcerned about his safety or that of the schoolchildren?
Why hasn’t a single person been fired, penalized, or reprimanded for the gross incompetence we witnessed that day?
Why haven’t authorities in the U.S. and abroad published the results of multiple investigations into trading that strongly suggested foreknowledge of specific details of the 9/11 attacks, resulting in tens of millions of dollars of traceable gains?
Why has Sibel Edmonds, a former FBI translator who claims to have knowledge of advance warnings, been publicly silenced with a gag order requested by Attorney General Ashcroft and granted by a Bush-appointed judge?
How could Flight 77, which reportedly hit the Pentagon, have flown back towards Washington D.C. for 40 minutes without being detected by the FAA’s radar or the even superior radar possessed by the US military?
How were the FBI and CIA able to release the names and photos of the alleged hijackers within hours, as well as to visit houses, restaurants, and flight schools they were known to frequent?
What happened to the over 20 documented warnings given our government by 14 foreign intelligence agencies or heads of state?
Why did the Bush administration cover up the fact that the head of the Pakistani intelligence agency was in Washington the week of 9/11 and reportedly had $100,000 wired to Mohamed Atta, considered the ringleader of the hijackers?
Why did the 911 Commission fail to address most of the questions posed by the families of the victims, in addition to almost all of the questions posed here?
Why was Philip Zelikow chosen to be the Executive Director of the ostensibly independent 911 Commission although he had co-authored a book with Condoleezza Rice?
Out of time, got to go. Don’t invade any more countries in my absence please.
Pray for peace.
March 15th, 2007 at 8:02 am
“This is too easy”…. to do what? Your examples cite: rights that have been trampled in America, voting problems, and a vague reference to education, but I’ve not discussed those areas with you (until now). An easy rebuttal, or an easy distraction? You’ve tried to lead us into those areas before, so I’ll bite.
Long lines at US voting precincts are of concern to you? Simple answer: If there are insufficient numbers of voting machines in Democrat precincts, it’s because the Democrats in charge of that precinct failed to order enough machines. You’ve been watching the news channels that only give one side of the story again. Do you have any problem with the ACORN activities in East St. Louis; vote-buying, multiple registrations, etc.? I’m actually thankful for the long lines there – the busses were unable to take their paid voters to all of the precincts in which each voter had registered. Do we have problems? Yes – within both parties.
As a teacher, I have more familiarity with nclb than I wish to discuss fully. It was a bi-partisan effort, with every wish of the Democrats satisfied, and is a failure. I know of no mention of “recruiters” in the nclb act, but you might have different sources.
Yes, my responses are long on opinion, but those opinions have been formed from substance. I have no idea what “your Nation’s right to dictate to others” means. Did we dictate something to Canadians, with my support, and I missed it? Another distraction?
Lots of questions, some of them not based on pure speculation, and I also want answers to lots of questions. Maybe we’ll find those answers in Orwell, Herman, Shakespeare or “Chicken Little”, but I doubt it.
March 15th, 2007 at 10:03 am
hmmm – previous posting blocked? sent to the bit bucket? pbcak?
link below
I know how much you enjoy those Mann Coulter screeds on your book shelf tv.
He was the speaker to introduce Mitt (Magic Underpants) Romney at CPAC this year and had the usual respectful, reasoned, intelligent things to say (end sarcasm)
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/03/eliminationism-in-america-appendix.html
these aren’t joe nobody blog posters using the f-word (o my!)
March 15th, 2007 at 3:48 pm
inky-doo says, “these aren’t joe nobody posters using the f-word (o my!)” hmmm – “Sock” Sokolowski & an anonymous Free Republic poster used the f-word…. but these aren’t joe nobody posters? I agree with knarlyknight; you are funny.
I have no Mann Coulter screeds on my book shelf, but I do have those of both Clintons, Al Franken, and Michael Moore. I’m not a Mitt Romney fan, I have never blocked a posting, and I don’t know who “he was the speaker” is. None of this seems to refer to the original topic or anything that has been discussed on this string. Straw man stuff? Grasping at straws? Has my earlier test been graded yet? Did your “blocked post” include responses to my right back at ya at the end of the test? Is this your response to my request for you to identify examples of my supposed hate speech? Does the list of obvious satirical quotations make me a Nazi? A racist? Is this a screed? As always, pick a question; please justify your answer.
March 15th, 2007 at 4:22 pm
The ‘Confessions’ Of Khalid
Sheikh Mohammed
From Nila Sagadevan
3-15-7
According to the headline article on BBC’s front page, KSM is claimed to have admitted to the kangaroo court that tried him:
” I was responsible for the 9/11 operation, from A to Z.”
KSM’s confession was announced to the world by the very people who routinely torture prisoners, hold secret military trials behind closed doors, and bar all lawyers and reporters from being anywhere near the courtroom.
But you do believe them, don’t you?
(Boy, is this going to confound the millions of FoxNews- and Limbaugh-trained Bushie buffoons who still believe Saddam did it!)
Now, if I could ask KSM a few questions to satisfy my own nagging curiosity, here’s what they’d be:
1. If you were indeed “responsible for the 9/11 operation, from A to Z” as you claim you were, why did your boss, Usama, categorically deny the attacks in 2001?
If you guys really are the arch-enemies of civilization, then the strike against your most hated enemy on 9/11 would have been something for you to shout about. After all, none of your operatives were caught prior to their missions; they successfully bypassed airport security; they successfully hijacked passenger jets and subdued the passengers; they successfully evaded a US military response; they successfully flew the planes with absolute precision even though they themselves barely knew how to fly; they successfully demolished the twin towers; and they successfully struck at the heart of the US military.
You claim you had masterminded and executed the most brilliant plan ever hatched, so you could rightfully have claimed with pride that you were a terrorist genius non pareil and the world’s #1 bad guy back in 2001, yet Usama denied all responsibility in an interview he gave Ummat Magazine immediately following 9/11. Why?
Oh, I get it! Usama wasn’t kidding — he didn’t do it! That’s why he isn’t on the FBI’s “most wanted” list! And that’s why that agency has openly admitted there isn’t a shred of evidence that ties Usama to the attacks. So it was you all along, you sly devil you!
2. Why did you inform a select group of bankers – and the CIA – of your plans?
It’s clear you did, because it’s been proved that pre-9/11 insider trading on United Airlines and American Airlines options lead directly to the highest ranks of the CIA. Investigations proved that none of your people benefited from any of these transactions. So what’s with your desire to make the CIA brass rich? There was a jump in United Air Lines 90 times (not 90 percent) above normal between September 6 and September 10, and 285 times higher than average on the Thursday before the attack. There was a jump in American Airlines put options 60 times (not 60 percent) above normal on the day before the attacks. No similar trading occurred on any other airlines.
Between September 6-10, 2001, the Chicago Board Options Exchange saw suspicious trading on Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley, two of the largest WTC tenants. An average of 3,053 put options in Merrill Lynch were bought between Sept. 6-10, compared to an average of 252 in the previous week. Merrill Lynch, another WTC tenant, saw 12,215 put options bought between Sept. 7-10, when the previous days had seen averages of 212 contracts a day.
According to Dylan Ratigan of Bloomberg News: “This would be the most extraordinary coincidence in the history of mankind if it was a coincidence. This could very well be insider trading at the worst, most horrific, most evil use you’ve ever seen in your entire life. It’s absolutely unprecedented.”
Most of these transactions were handled primarily by Deutsche Bank-A.B.Brown, a firm which until 1998 was chaired by A. B.”Buzzy” Krongard, who later became executive director of the CIA.
C’mon, KSM, level with me…How could you, the “arch enemy of America” wish for your enemies to benefit so hugely under your name?
3. Why did you ask FEMA to be in New York the day BEFORE 9/11?
FEMA emergency teams conveniently arrived in New York on 9/10 in preparation for an emergency “drill”. If you didn’t ask them to be there, who did? Or was this just an incredible coincidence?
Or perhaps you thought some of your chaps would survive the fireballs and require a little First Aid?
4. How on earth did you manage to divert NORAD’s attention by getting them to play those silly war games that morning? And five of them? And some of the exercises actually involving ‘live hijackings’? And you managed to pull all this off from a cave in Bora Bora? How?
5. Why did you tell Larry Silverstein months in advance to prepare WTC 7 for demolition?
You had to have told him — Mr. Silverstein openly admitted that he “pulled” it. We all know “pull” is industry jargon for a controlled demolition. Silverstein couldn’t possibly have had the building wired and loaded for a “pull” on the day your lads attacked us – it takes months of preparation to set up a building for a pull. So you had to have have told Mr. Silverstein of your plans well in advance.
What’s your little thing with Lucky Larry?
6. Why did you inform, of all people, the Israelis of your plans?
If you didn’t tell them, who did? Five cheering Israeli “art students” were videotaping your attacks on the Twin Towers as they happened, yelping shouts of joy and mockery. According to ABC’s 20/20, when the van in which they were traveling was later stopped by the police, the driver of the van, Sivan Kurzberg, told the officers: “We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem.”
Why did he feel that Palestinians were a problem for the NYPD? Also, there were traces of explosives discovered in the van. Since it was you who had to have told the Israelis about your plans, it surely must have been you who also supplied the explosives to the Israelis? What’s with that?
7. How did you manage to get the entire United States Air Force to stand down on the day of your attack?
The US military has spent billions of dollars developing spy satellites, and stealth aircraft which are invisible to radar so they can mount surprise attacks on adversaries, but it seems they should have saved their money and bought a fleet of airliners, because they appear to be far more effective.
On 9/11 the world’s only military superpower was apparently oblivious to the location of your hijacked airliners in it’s airspace for almost two hours, and military commanders were left perplexed on how to deal with the situation of your flying aces using these planes as flying bombs – and wielding silly little boxcutters, no less. This confusion resulted in our fighter jets flying around aimlessly whilst the hierarchy fully assessed what was going on, and this total lack of cohesion ultimately led to the loss of nearly 3,000 lives. How did you know that all that was required to outsmart America’s military might on 9/11 were 19 of your guys armed with box cutters aboard 4 airliners?
8. Why did you inform the US Secret Service that President Bush would not be a target?
President Bush’s agenda on the morning of 9/11 had been widely publicized, so you must have known he was going to be at the The Booker Elementary School in Florida. The school video shows the Secret Service did not rush in to remove the President to a secure location, or at least to the safety of the armored Presidential Limousine. That’s their job. That’s what they do in the case of a real surprise attack with many unknowns. They don’t do anything else.
But the Secret Service did absolutely nothing for 25 minutes after President Bush was told the nation was under attack (Neither did the president, but at least he had an excuse – he was busy reading about a pet goat). So our president must have known he was NOT one of the targets that morning. Why did you mercifully spare your arch enemy, when you could have nailed him in mid-sentence with another Boeing? Talk about a major feather in your cap! You’d have eclipsed your boss as #1 evildoer and become the darling of the entire ‘evil’ Islamic world. Why did you blow this brilliant opportunity when you had a sitting duck (goat?) for a target?
9. Why did you contact New York’s authorities to inform them that the WTC 7 was going to collapse?
Again, you had to have, because they knew it was going to collapse. No steel-framed building had ever collapsed through fire prior to 9/11, but Giuliani and his cohorts knew! There was no factual or historical basis for this prediction. When was Giuliani warned? Why were only a select few people warned?
I just don’t understand you, Khalid. You let Giuliani take all the credit and walk away with the mantle of Time’s ‘Man Of The Year’ while you take it in the shorts and end up in Guantanamo?
10. How did you manage to plant explosives in the twin towers to ensure perfect collapses?
Explosives had to have been used, because all 3 towers collapsed into their own footprints at near-freefall speeds. This kind of collapse is impossible without explosives.
How did your boys gain access to these buildings months in advance of 9/11 in order to place and wire the explosives? You absolutely had to have been in cahoots with Bush’s two cousins and their security company, Securacom, which provided security for the entire WTC complex, not to mention the airports from where your teams took off. How else could you have gained access?
11. Once the dust had settled, how did you make provisions with the Bush administration to ensure the investigation into the collapse of the twin towers would be an under-funded farce?
Over $65 million was spent investigating Bill Clinton’s sexual indiscretions, but the entire 9/11 Commission only spent $15 million. How did you manage to pull this off? And why? Was your reason in any way connected to your desire to have all the WTC steel – vital crime scene evidence of your dastardly crime – shipped to smelting plants in China, Korea and India as quickly as possible before experts could analyze the steel for signs of explosives?
If so, while you were at it, why didn’t you also hush-up the editors of the respected Fire Engineering magazine who later called the WTC investigation a “half-baked farce”?
12. Why didn’t you know the identities of your own “hand-picked” hijackers?
How is it that 7 of your crack kamikaze team are alive and well in the Middle East? We’re told that your guys were highly trained experts, with knowledge of how to steal identities and forge fake IDs. If so, how come these men were incapable of correctly filling in US visa applications?
We also know that they spent the night before the attack getting drunk in bars, making noise, lapping up lap dances, screaming insults at the “infidels”, and doing everything they could to attract attention to themselves. (Shame on you as a good Muslim for picking un-Islamic scum like these guys for your holy mission against “Satan”.) They used credit cards issued in their stolen names, allowed their driver’s licenses with the stolen names to be photocopied, and used public library computers to send emails back and forth using their stolen names signed to unencrypted messages about their plans to steal aircraft and crash them into buildings, then decorated their apartments with absurdly obvious props such as a crop dusting manual to the point where the whole affair reads like a low budget “B” detective movie from the 1930s.
In short, these men did everything they could to make sure everyone knew who they were and what it was they were up to. How could you have been this stupid, and yet managed to outsmart NORAD and the USAF?
13. Finally, how did you manage to get these guys aboard their respective aircraft?
Were they hideaways aboard airport ‘honeywagons’ who then crawled up the crap hoses into the aircraft toilets?
Look, none of your guys had an airline reservation; not one of them had a ticket; not one presented his ID to airline counter staff; not one was assigned a seat; not one was issued a boarding pass – but they all managed to board their airplanes!
Not one of their names appeared on a single flight manifest!
Khalid, ol’ man, you truly are a master evildoer, a furtive genius whose shenanigans make 007 look like a kindergartener.
I salute you.
March 15th, 2007 at 7:04 pm
Knarley,
Why do you go to such great lengths to stand up for our enemy? Here’s a thought, a guy that just orchestrated the slaughter of 3000 innocent Americans might have told a fib. Here is a link to a PBS article when he finally did admit resposibility. They are neither radical or ratical.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/binladen_10-29-04.html
That’s it, that’s all I can take. I was going to go over is point by point, but the rest is just ridiculous.
You’re an intelligent person, it seems like you have a normal life, it is normal to have a difference of opinion about whether we should be where we are doing whatever it is we are doing at any given time. Those things are in the real world, but my god man, get a grip. Do you just hate violence or war or America so much that you will believe anything that will bolster your beliefs, I just don’t get it.
March 15th, 2007 at 8:15 pm
Knarley,
I am so sorry, how could I be so blind. After I had finally given up, I took a long hard look at some of the sites you suggested. This prompted me to look even further, you would not believe what I have uncovered. Dick Cheney is not who he seems. He is actually an actor names Sam Levi. The real Dick Cheney is 6 foot 1, 210 pound of no nonsense navy seal trained though as steel man. Why do you think the guys beheading civilians wore hoods, they couldn’t show their faces because they are not Arab, they are as white as you and me. Cheney did the killings, the victims were political enemies of the Bush administration, and weren’t killed in Iraq. They were killed in a small town in South Dakota. Shortly after 911 the CIA purchased the farm from a family named Douglas, Oliver and Lisa. The Douglas’ moved under the cover of darkness to the south of France. Since the CIA had secured 15 billion in gold by tunneling under the World Trade Center and raiding the vaults, the Douglas’ were paid handsomely. Mrs. Douglas has adjusted to her newfound wealth well, employing servants to do her knitting. She does insist on hanging her dry cleaning on the line but that is all. Mr. Douglas is having a harder time adjusting, he recently fired the captain of his yacht the “Arnold Ziffle” because the captain refused to install an eight foot trolling plate behind the screws.
The farm has been transferred into a prison/torture center where the political enemies of Bush and Blair are transferred. Guantanamo Bay is really a front, the “prisoners” are actually Marine recruits that oppose the “war”. Behind the façade of cages is a state of the art studio that Rupert Murdoch operates, producing elaborate battle scenes in front of the largest blue screen in the world. Have you noticed all the shots of the war are either of soldiers entering houses shot from just a few feet, or an aerial view from several thousand feet, nothing in between. Makes you wonder doesn’t it.
And where are the Taliban and Bin Laden ? One minute they owned Afghanistan, the next they were gone. My sources say they were paid off and moved to an island off the coast of Tasmania. An elaborate scheme involving, more gold from the WTC, g-strings, and corn was used to ensure they will never want for anything. If you don’t believe me answer this. Why has Bush suddenly endorsed ethanol as a fuel, and look at Victoria Secret stocks for the first half of 2005, they rose almost 3% in 5 months. The “official” explanation was the introduction of a new bra, but does that really make sense, I think not.
Thanks for the enlightenment.
Screw the troops
Mohammed country boy
March 15th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
SHCB – Thank you for your post before your last one. I will be sincere here.
I like you. Well a little less after your last posts, but that’s part of the package.
We do not understand each other very well. (By the way, I think guys like Khalid Sheikh Mohamedd are probably the lowest of the low, and for all I know he is guilty of many, many horrible things. I do not defend him. I know virtually nothing about him except a little bit about what the media tells us that his American interragaters have said that he said, or perhaps made him say, or whatever. Just because I question that does not mean that I think he`s a good guy. Sheesh.)
Thank you for saying I am intelligent. You are too.
When you described yourself earlier, I recognized all kinds of stereotypes in my head “about your type” that probably would be wrong. I tried to resist pre-judging you. I sensed you did some of the same about me.
I absolutely love your country’s Declaration of Independence, and I respect and admire your Bill of Rights. I love the idea that is America. To over-generalize, I find Americans straighforward, fun and extremely capable at whatever they set their minds towards.
Therefore I strongly reject people or actions that threaten your Constitution and your Bill of Rights whether foreigners to you, American citizens who do not realize the treasure that your country’s founding fathers have imparted to your people, or worst of all those lawmakers in your government who through negligence, cowardice, or design would implement anything that takes away from your liberty.
You proudly described many aspects of yourself and local culture in an earlier post. I understand that – including the part about bullying and baiting Liberals and others who you see as naïve. I understand and accept that aspect of you, and I think it is a good thing within the confines of your culture. But it highlights that we are different. In my circle (sub-culture) such bullying is outlandish boorish behavior that has no place in a civilized discussion. That doesn’t make it wrong and it doesn’t make it something that I have to get all upset about (except with myself to the extent that I have taken jabs at you.) It is a minor cultural difference.
So then I think to myself: if such a minor cultural difference can potentially affect a discussion between an American and a Canadian so profoundly, imagine what it must be like for an Iraqi whose life is steeped in tradition and loyalty to his family and clan and who solemnly prays 5 times a day. He now has to get through checkpoints of American GI’s who are mostly recruited from underpriviledged sections of society and who may not give a flying fuck about that persons rights as a human being, let alone as an Iraqi going about his business and important (to him) traditions.
I expect the American government to provide other peoples in foreign lands with the same respect that their own founding principles impart upon U.S citizens; and to recognize that the whole world is not America’s to consume. People of other nations have their own destiny to follow. I am disappointed by examples of Amerikan meddling, e.g. hearing about death squads in El Salvadore 20 years ago and then learning the full complicity of the CIA in that is utterly disconcerting and it sure made me question what it is exactly that the people who control Amerika actually stand for.
You say it seems like I have a normal life. My life so far has not been normal. I would describe it more like it has been “charmed.” I`m in my second marriage and have been very fortunate in many things and unfortunate in only a few things. I am very happy and very grateful to circumstance. I am not religious in the traditional sense, but find my sense of spirituality is awakening even as I logically and consciously try to be skeptical about such things.
I recognize that America’s role in the world, now and especially in the time before I was born, could very well have been and most probably is the reason why I get to sit here in peace and prosperity with people I love and feel secure. If that is so, which I am confident it may be, then my heartfelt thank-you, to you and your country folk and yes the US military too, is not misplaced. To be clear: thank you SHCB for you and your country`s direct and indirect contributions to my life, and especially for the contributions of your country`s military, past and present.
I have no first hand experience with war. I like paintball and that’s about as close to war as it gets for me. But I have an imagination, and can vividly put myself in the position of someone who has been bombed, of someone whose young child has been killed or worse. I want a more peaceful world, and I know from history that even though there has been successes in getting us to where we are now, there are grander cycles that keep repeating, and there are periods in those cycles that I do not want my children or your country’s children to have to live through, never mind you or me. (Orwell gives one such warning.)
I have grown and changed significantly over my lifetime. I used to believe almost everything I read. Now I question everything, or try to. and contrary to accusations above I do not buy in to everything on the sites I’ve referenced. I understand why they are hard for most people to take seriously, but do believe that examining them with a critical eye and an open mind is an excellent mental exercise.
I did not like those `crazy` sites at first either. Once I recognized what “might” be true on those “crazy” sites, then I could really start to see what “might” be false in more mainstream media. Then, the world starts to make a whole lot more sense. That’s because the truth usually lies somewhere in between. But I would never have gotten there if I had refused to examine something because it just sounds crazy on the surface: I would have just stagnated where I was conditioned by my teachers and society and the people who manipulate the media wanted me (the public) to sit and stagnate (or become frenzied into war.)
So that`s my attempt to explain what I know about myself, for your amusement or benefit.
March 15th, 2007 at 11:10 pm
Dear Mohammed Country Boy,
You are a twit.
March 15th, 2007 at 11:13 pm
TV: I doubt that you’ve read the information on the links I provide simply because (a) you offer rebuttals that show no recognition of the material that was provided (e.g. rebuttals to PM, NIST etc. on the scholars website) and (b) you mock any reference to any source that is not neo-con. Scholar, professors , whatever – the point is that they are far more qualified than you, have catalogued physical aspects of your governments conspiracy explanation s that make little sense, and they have suffered personally and professionally from going public contrary to your slanderous accusation that they do it for the notoriety.
—
The “14 Characteristics of Facism” research provided earlier was dismissed by TV, citing that it might have been developed by Democrats and it was tarnished because it was published in a year preceding a US election. That prole-like “reasoning” might be accepted by republican cheerleaders, but it doesn’t cut it with thinking people.
So TV, we await substance: if you don’t like the research that I gave to you, exactly when will you provide a better set of characteristics defining fascism than what Free Enquiry magazine published, so that we can discuss how well it describes fascist regimes in other countries and whether it fits the American experience 2001 -2007?
—-
TV calls himself a teacher and then casts doubts on the applicability of literature; then compares the usefulness of Chicken Little to Shakespeare. He shows no inkling of the value that stories and myths serve anthropologically, or in understanding what goes on in the world. Here’s a hint TV: history repeats itself. Stories are based on the human experience (history) and they parlay these messages to those who open their minds to them now and in the future.
Stories, myths and metaphors provide infinitely deeper levels of meaning than what you can find at your typical American strip mall or in an Amerikan government war room (at least as described in, for example, Woodward’s “Plan of Attack”).
Orwell’s ’84 is prized by many because of its metaphorical and analogical qualities, much taken from the Nazi-nationalism of Germany early/mid last century. It’s not just a fairy tale, it is a consolidation of ideas from that dark period projected into a generic future to serve as a Norse-like ruin stone and warning to the reader.
If you prefer history over literature, perhaps you could Google search what the British army’s experience was in Iraq from 1914 to 1924 and ask yourself this: do you think Bush took any lessons from those experiences (IMO obviously not), and if your Leaders had done so would America now be stuck in fairly similar circumstances to what the British faced then? That is the value of history. It is similar to the value of literature.
TV, by the way what subject do you teach?
March 15th, 2007 at 11:22 pm
—
This doesn’t prove anything, it’s just interesting to see an article on Ohio election fraud just hours after I used it in my previous post:
Election workers sentenced for rigging ’04 recount
http://zanesvilletimesrecorder.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070314/NEWS01/703140311/1002
—
New flash. Iraq:
WASHINGTON — The U.S. military for the first time Wednesday said in a new report that some of the violence in Iraq can be described as a civil war.
In its bleakest assessment of the war to date, a quarterly Pentagon report said October through December of last year was the most violent three-month period since 2003. Attacks and casualties suffered by coalition and Iraqi forces and civilians were higher than in any other similar time span, it said
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070315/NATIONWORLD/703150495/-1/ZONES04
This is sad. I pray for your troop, and I pray for the Iraqis.
SHCB said that it is still early days in the war (what, the mission is not accomplished?). Your troops seem to be going on the same trajectory since invading 4 years ago (if war is hell are they on a trajectory to hell?)
Here’s a good idea, why don’t you send in another 22,500 troops to ransack houses in Baghdad, them Iraqi’s will love that!
TV, what if your country was overrun by strange looking soldiers who had no concept of your clan loyalties, basic religious thoughts, ideas of justice, sacred traditions from 2000 years of history, or your rejection of the strange soldier`s form of government, etc. and then they continued to act like bulls in a china shop (the vets say they’re really acting like scared US teenagers) and were armed with modern automatic weapons that shot uranium tipped bullets that caused the miscarriage and deformity rates to soar in former war zones?
—
TV you say most people in the US reject 911 Truthers. That may be so; but there is more to this. Since you live on an isolated acreage I won’t fault you too much for not noticing that it is mostly corporate media that is trying to ignore 911 truth seekers. (Which relates to why the issue of fascism is important.)
Despite the Corporate MSM attempts to kill this issue, Time magazine admitted in its 2006 coverage that disbeleif in the government’s version of events was “… not a fringe phenomenon. It is a mainstream political reality.”
Despite MSM attempts to kill the issue, New Yorkers (most likely of all Americans to try to get informed about the issue, but still dominated by the Amerika’s MSM) are dubious of their own Government’s conspiracy theory.
I know you hate sources, but:
In August 2004, a Zogby International poll indicated that 49.3% New York City residents and 41% of New York citizens “overall” say US Leaders “knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act”.[7] In July 2006, a Scripps Howard and Ohio University poll concluded that “Thirty-six percent of respondents overall said it is “very likely” or “somewhat likely” that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them”,
You’re technically right in your statement that most Americans believe their government’s conspiracy theory that Dr. Evil and his Saudi henchmen made precision controlled demolitions of three Manhattan skyscrapers and puncturing a hole in the Pentagon with hijacked airplanes, but you are way off in terms of the big picture.
We can agree to disagree. It is not a matter for the right evidence to appear to resolve the issue. The evidence abounds. What is needed is a full impartial hearing before an unfettered court. So far your Leader has failed to provide that, but the subject might come up at his war crimes trial.
—
March 17th, 2007 at 10:55 pm
JBC – Thank you for posting the statistically weird graphs comparing Iraq to Vietnam, I have visited this site for updates on that for years. They are Interesting to say the least.
—
SHCB- Thanks for your pointing out the 2004 bin Laden video. It is much better than the 2001 confession video, as the star of that show had very little resemblance to bin Laden.
Regarding the 2004 video, TeacherVet would agree thta since this tape was released in late October just before the US elections it must be discarded as it must be a bogus political tool to garner support for the sitting “president”. Just kidding. That is not why it is bogus. It is bogus because it does not look like bin Laden (the beard and the turban are a good match though). His nose in the 2004 video is shorter than in OBL pictures and flatter, and the head width at the temple is wider relative to the face than the real O bin Laden. But all Arabs look the same to you guys right so what does that matter… Also, ‘ bin Laden “aged enormously” between 1997 & 2001 due to kidney problems, lack of sunlight and a poor diet, but between 2001 & 2004 he “unaged”. ‘
Suspicious indeed, but IN MY OPINION IT IS NOT CONCLUSIVE. Just food for thought, a little mental exercise for you to consider. It is set out here fairly well:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osamatape2.html
—
This, however is conclusive:
“[Khalid Shaikh Mohammed’s alleged confession testimony has been thoroughly discredited after it emerged that one of the targets he identified, the Plaza Bank, was not founded until 2006, four years after the alleged Al-Qaeda mastermind’s arrest.
In his confession, KSM claims, “I was responsible for planning, training, surveying, and financing for the New (or Second) Wave of attacks against the following skyscrapers after 9/11: …Plaza Bank, Washington state.”
KSM was arrested in March 2003. According to the Plaza Bank’s website, the organization was founded in early 2006, making it impossible for KSM to have even known of the bank’s existence before 2003, never mind plotted against it.
Skepticism about the legitimacy of KSM’s confession has gushed forth from all quarters, leaving the credibility of the Pentagon and the process of military tribunals in ruins and provoking additional questions about why the alleged Al-Qaeda mastermind admitted to involvement in such a vast range of plots.
“Almost every major European terrorism expert does not believe the Mohammed confession and they have been on state-owned and private news networks in Europe stating that the confession has more to do with Bush’s failures in Iraq than in any credible connection with the three dozen terrorist plots claimed by Mohammed. ]”
“If Bush can’t have Mohammed murdered, the US government will have to shut Mohammed away where he cannot talk and tell his tale. The US government will have to replicate Orwell’s memory hole by destroying Mohammed’s mind with mind-altering drugs and abuse.
“It is to such depths that George Bush and Dick Cheney have lowered America.” Not just George and Dick, but all the enablers in the US Government as well as the proles who do not want to face the truth and hold their Leaders accountable.”
—–
AND AS FOR GWYN DYER on LOOSE CHANGE, the “Morons and Magic” theme begins in the fourth paragraph below:
Morons and Magic: A Reply to George Monbiot
By David Ray Griffin
03/07/07 “ICH ” — –
In “Bayoneting a Scarecrow The 9/11 conspiracy theories are a coward’s cult.” (Guardian, February 20: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article17223.htm),
George Monbiot accuses members of the 9/11 truth
movement of being “morons” and “idiots” who
believe in “magic.” Having in his previous
attack—“A 9/11 conspiracy virus is sweeping the
world,” Guardian, February 6—called me this
movement’s “high priest,” he now describes my
9/11 writing as a “concatenation of ill-attested nonsense.”
If my books are moronic nonsense, then people who
have endorsed them must be morons. Would Monbiot
really wish to apply this label to Michel
Chossudovsky, Richard Falk, Ray McGovern, Michael
Meacher, John McMurtry, Marcus Raskin, Rosemary
Ruether, Howard Zinn, and the late Rev. William
Sloane Coffin, who, after a stint in the CIA,
became one of America’s leading civil rights,
anti-war, and anti-nuclear activists?
If anyone who believes that 9/11 was an inside
job is by definition an idiot, then Monbiot
would have to sling that label at Colonel Robert
Bowman, former head of the U.S. “Star Wars”
program; Andreas von Bülow, former State
Secretary in the German Federal Ministry of
Defense; former CIA analysts Bill Christison and
Robert David Steele; former Scientific American
columnist A. K. Dewdney; General Leonid Ivashov,
former chief of staff of the Russian armed
forces; Colonel Ronald D. Ray, former U.S. Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Defense; all the members
of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, Scholars for 9/11
Truth and Justice, Veterans for 9/11 Truth, and
Pilots for 9/11 Truth; and most of the
individuals listed under “Professors Question
9/11” on the “Patriots Question 9/11” website.
One of the reasons these people reject the
government’s conspiracy theory is that, if they
were to accept the official account of the
destruction of the World Trade Centre, they would
need to affirm magical beliefs. A few examples:
The Twin Towers came straight down, which means
that each building’s 287 steel columns all had to
fail simultaneously; to believe this could happen
without explosives is to believe in magic.
At the onset of each tower’s collapse, steel
beams were ejected out as far as 600 feet; to
believe that these horizontal ejections could be
explained by gravitational energy, which is vertical, is to believe in magic.
Virtually all of the concrete in the towers was
pulverized into extremely fine dust particles; to
believe that fire plus gravity could have done this is to believe in magic.
WTC 7 and the towers came down at virtually
free-fall speed, meaning that the lower floors,
with all their steel and concrete, provided no
resistance to the upper floors; to believe this
could happen without explosives is to believe in magic.
Pools of molten metal were found under each
building. Because steel does not begin to melt
until it reaches about 1,540°C and yet the fires
could not have gotten over 1000°C, to accept the
fire theory is to believe in magic.
Monbiot, regarding the 9/11 truth movement’s
conspiracy theory as a wrong-headed distraction,
fails to see that the obviously false and truly
distracting conspiracy theory is the official
9/11 myth, which has been used to justify
imperial wars and increased militarism, thereby
distracting attention from global apartheid and
the ecological crisis. We focus on the 9/11 myth
because, until it is exposed, getting our
governments to focus wholeheartedly on the truly
urgent issues of our time will be impossible.
David Ray Griffin has published over 30 books,
including four about 9/11. His next book,
Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular
Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official
Conspiracy Theory, will be out in April.
—–
I wonder if a simple real life illustration might also help explain things to the truth deniers:
Why has no-one yet to posted a video of a steel bar holding some heavy weight and being subjected to fire fueled by aviation fuel & office debris? I suspect it is because it would be boring – nothing would happen.
—
Host, congrats on getting your server back on-line.
—
March 17th, 2007 at 11:00 pm
Wow, I never thought Donald would agree with me, I guess he`s been reading my posts on this site:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Download/15372/1/TSR-Trump-Bush.wmv
Uuhh, But Donald, it`s not just Bush who is lying, it is the government military corporate media collusion of lies to control the proles. Maybe Trump hasn`t read Orwell yet.
March 17th, 2007 at 11:50 pm
SHCB re: Leavenworth – upon re-reading I agree you did not threaten me, veiled or otherwise. My apologies SHCB. My mistake arose because I resented your accusing M Moore of being my hero and I took your strong words about courage and spitting on the troops personally, so in anger my mind paraphrased the whole thing- incorrectly. Clearly I was wrong about that, you meant no such thing.
TeacherVet re: Is the US Dictating to other Countries – good choice calling me on that one. I am not willing to go into details here and now, and suspect I might get an education from you on how what I think is dictating is to you actually assisting. Maybe JDC we should start another thread on that, but here and now I would rather get the focus back to Gwyn Dyers sloppiness in slamming Loose Change.
—-
Oh, the Donald talks a bit about the troops in Iraq too …
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=01e_1174091038&o=1
This is relevant to Gwyns sloppiness on 911 because the Iraq war was justified mostly on LIES that festered and grew out of 911.
March 18th, 2007 at 7:28 am
Hi Knarley,
Sorry about making you so mad, I think we have a mutual respect for each other, at least I hope we do. But you have to remember, in this debate, and many to come I’m sure, we have many roles. We are of course talking one on one, we are also members of two competing theater groups, I looked up the traffic on this site, and it is pretty impressive if the data was correct. So we are playing to the crowd, as such we use each other as straight men for jokes, and villains so the we can make ourselves heroes. We have serious issues to discus here, but that doesn’t mean we can’t have a little fun, even if it is at the other’s expense. I enjoy a good redneck joke as well as the next guy.
On the conspiracy theories. I have looked at the evidence and just find it completely implausible. I also find the non conspiracy science very credible. I think possibly some science may have been “created” (that last word was a gift, have fun) that day, in as much as I don’t believe anything like this had happened before. As I’ve posted in great detail, the number of people involved would be daunting. You can mobilize large groups of people to secretly carry out a mission if most don’t really know the whole plan, and they all have the same purpose. Two that come to mind are the deception by the Allies before Normandy, and Schwarzkopf’s flanking maneuver in the first gulf war. In this case there are simply too many diverse people with too wide array of motives. Finally, there is no motive worth the risk, the president doesn’t need congressional authorization, and he doesn’t need the approval of the American public to go to war, he may need it stay engaged, but not to go to war. Clinton attacked Iraq and the Sudan on a number of occasions, not to this degree to be sure about the same number of people were opposed to those attacks then because we thought they were just to mask his ethical troubles here.
Sadam had not kept to his word regarding the cease fire, and we waited 18 months to attack Iraq, after getting control of Afghanistan. If this was all a ruse to have the moral authority to attack another country why wait a year and a half. When I say we are early in this war, I am talking about the war on terror, or Islomofascism. We are well on our way to completing the campaign in Iraq, we have accomplished all our objectives, we just need to get the country stabilized and the Iraqi police and army able to hold their own. George Will said something to the effect of “a country isn’t viable until it has a monopoly on violence”. We will then move on to the next target, probably Iran because with the fall of Iran so will Syria fall.
If you want an example of what Iraq should have done after the first gulf war if it didn’t want to be invaded, study what South Africa did after the end of Apartheid. As punishment for decades of abuse of the black population, the UN mandated that South Africa dismantle it’s nuclear weapons program. It did with complete cooperation, the destruction of missiles and enrichment facilities was carried out under constant supervision of the UN and unlimited access to whatever facilitys the inspectors wanted to see was given at a moments notice. For their cooperation, we have left them in peace.
The rest of the world does look at us bullies, I can’t help that. “Everyone makes fun of the redneck until the car breaks down”. We spend an incredible amount of money in real dollars on defense. More than a lot of countries total GDP. Thanks to the natural resources of America and the ingenuity and work ethic of our people we can afford it. Much as Barbra Streisand, thanks to incredible natural talent and hard work can give to many worthwhile charities. In the process of protecting ourselves we protect the free world, we don’t mind. A little appreciation would be nice, but that’s ok. With that might comes a little well deserved swagger and bluster, I can’t help it.
A quick story, (fat chance). When I was a freshman in high school, a junior, who was one of the biggest bullies in the school started picking on me, of course a girl was involved. He was bigger than me, much tougher and always had a half dozen buddies around him. After a couple beatings, I decided the little girl wasn’t that great and told him I would never look at here or talk to her again. I surrendered. The intimidation didn’t stop, in fact it increased, there was some sport in it now for him. This went on for a couple months. One of my football teammates, who was a senior, noticed my distress, I gave him my story telling him the bully had said he was going to ambush me on my walk home after practice that day. My teammate gave me a safe ride home that night, and the next day he informed me that a number of the senior class linemen and the quarterback of our team had met this gentleman in the halls of the school and had “persuaded” him that if anyone was going to beat the crap out of ole Shcb, it was them. The bully after that would avoid even walking down the same hallway as me. The moral of this story is one of good and evil and their use of force. The guys that came to my rescue were using much the same tactics as the evil bully, the difference was they stopped using force after the job was done and didn’t terrorize others once they saw the power they wielded. The end result was I was able to continue on with my life without fear of either side.
Some time ago, someone on this site asked why we had not attacked Saudi Arabia. Because diplomacy is working there, the Saudi’s are doing a much better job of curbing the proliferation of terrorist enlistment and production in their nation. Don’t think the pulling of our troops and the closing of our bases there after 911 wasn’t a threat to the Royal Family and the Saudi government. We don’t attack without provocation, we don’t attack without exhausting diplomatic solutions and we don’t hold countries after hostilities end.
I hope this finds you and yours happy and well
Shcb
March 18th, 2007 at 1:13 pm
Hi guys. I have been unable to access this site since last Friday evening – every time I tried, receiving a “WordPress error” message. I contacted a couple of other regular visitors to the site from this general area, and they had the same problem, so I knew I hadn’t personally been shut out. I think we all use Charter Communications, so the problem might have bee with them, although I was able to visit anywhere else I tried. The volume of postings over the weekend indicates that others have not had the same problem.
Knarley, you doubt that I have read your sources – wrong, but no matter. I must confess, however, that I have not explored all links provided on those linked sources. The scholars page contains about 600 additional links, with some of them containing links to dozens/hundreds of yet other links. You do the math. I cannot/will not devote the necessary days/weeks/months to explore thousands of links, since (1) many of them are simply redundancies, (2) the top link to “Why Doubt 911” provides an adequate synopsis of theories motivating the conspiracy theory that (3) I find wholly implausible and (4) sufficiently debunked, and (5) the sheer volume of redundancy does not impress or convince me.
One of the links that I did visit (it intrigued me), was also your link to a “confession” by someone who helped rig explosives in the towers. It is written as fact, and surely accepted as such by many, but is acknowledged as fiction in the small print at the bottom. I know; the fiction is purely based on historical “fact.”
I also failed to search every link provided on schb’s sources, but read enough to realize that the conspiracy conjecture (“facts,” if you prefer) had been seriously challenged, if not completely debunked. He knocked it outa-da-ball park.
You might also doubt that I’ve read every word of your posts because I don’t respond to every statement, or perhaps because you’re incredulous that I don’t fall in lockstep, but again, you would be wrong. (The following is meant to be a “heh” moment): If your reading comprehension is as impressive as your typing prowess, I can understand how you could read and retain info on thousands of pages in a short period of time. You posted a quick note to Mohammed Country Boy, then 3 minutes later a 500-word essay to me. Impressive.
I don’t care what Professor/scientist Trump has to say, either about the US administration or in a pro wrestling ring. Period. The fascism stuff? The term has been used so much that it has become a simple colloquialism, nothing but anti-Bush sentiment expressed as meaningless mantra. Again, redundancy does not make anything factual.
I will be back, probably within a week or so – some surgery/recovery will keep me from a computer for awhile, and I have to travel several hundred miles to Georgia for the procedure. I enjoy and appreciate honest discourse, and your approach to disagreement is refreshing.
March 18th, 2007 at 2:44 pm
No, the site was down from sometime Friday until late Saturday night. It was a server problem on my end. Sorry about that.
Good luck on the surgery.
John
March 18th, 2007 at 10:53 pm
Teacher, it would be sad to leave you and SHCB mystified at how I can post a short reply, and then 3 minutes later post a reply that would take longer than that to write.
The reason is because I use a word processor to sometimes write some material in advance. It also has the advantage of being able to be saved, and helps with editing. You should try it. No, I mean it, you really should try a little editing of what you write before posting.
Anyone else notice that whenever there is a posting of many questions that decimate the official 911 story, or gives a bulls-eye retort, then SHCB and TV provide a short denial then refer to fully rebuked biased hit pieces, and then pat each other on the back and launch into a longwinded story about their glory days or how force makes right? Why?! I suggest it is to bury the questions under their tome.
–
The 911 Truthers ask questions, and want honest answers that do not ignore basic physics and do not involve magic. SHCB and TV can deny and cast aspersions all day long, but the fact is there has not been a decent investigation.
It is kind of like what happened with the $15 million 911 investigation (remember $65 million was spent investigating Clinton contact of a blue dress). This tells all about the ostruction of a real investigation, with fully documented mainstream links: http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2005/11/theres-never-been-real-911.html
Then there is this from LancasterUkonline http://www.lancasterukonline.net/news/news_archive/2007/archive_02_07_i.html#911 :
” 9/02/07: I’m almost afraid of writing about this campaign…I saw William Rodriguez speak last night at St Martin’s College at the invitation of the 9/11 Truth Campaign UK. He was the janitor of the twin towers on 9/11. He talked about events on the day, and every word he said can be corroborated, and I believe him.
(snip)
Rodriguez speaks passionately about survivors and the victims’ families … He does not attribute blame but he speaks articulately and specifically about survivors’ testimony being repeatedly suppressed and excluded from the 9/11 commission report – the commission that only came about because they strenuously campaigned for it.
And he is passionately angry about the fact that the Federal Aviation Authority erased the tape recording of radio transmissions from the flight that allegedly hit the Pentagon and then de-materialised, before it was made available to any investigation or enquiry, on the pretext that hearing it would only cause pain to the victim’s relatives.
“This was an illegal suppression of evidence that was never punished or even investigated. If you lose someone close to you, do not let anyone ever tell you that you don’t have any right to know, or to try to find out, how it happened.” …
There’s a lot more – too much to cover here. …
See http://www.911truthcampaign.net ”
–
Which brings us back from SHCB and Teacher reminiscences about their glory days to: Gwynne Dyer on Loose Change.
Cutting through the crap, another blogger responded to Dyer with this:
” Two words: Operation Gladio.
Anyone who makes the tired “a wife would have blabbed” argument need only point to the most well documented false flag op(s) in history. Gladio is not controversial but openly acknowledged.
“But if the Gladio network was the armed force, the secret Masonic lodge “Propaganda Due” (P2) was the Elitist “shadow government” tasked with directing them. Adhering to a right wing ideology bordering on fascism, P2 was headed by Licio Gelli – known as the “Puppet-master.” During the war Gelli had been a member of Mussolini’s notorious “Black shirts,” and later acted as liaison officer to the Hermann Goering SS division. By 1974 P2 had in excess of 1000 members comprising a “who’s who” of Italian political, military and economic power. Members included four Cabinet ministers, three intelligence chiefs, 160 senior military officers, 48 MPs, the Army Chief of Staff, as well as top diplomats, bankers, industrialists and media publishers.”
We’re talking about a bare minimum of hundreds of people being “in the know”. It was kept secret for decades. Moreover, it was not merely one country but dozens.
“Italy was not alone in having covert “stay behind” units in operation. The operation encompassed all of western Europe. In France the unit was called “Glaive” – again named after a Gladiatorial sword. Austria’s unit was named “Schwert,” also meaning sword. In Turkey the unit was named “Red Sheepskin” and in Greece “Sheepskin.” Sweden’s unit was called “Sveaborg.” In Switzerland it went by the title P26. Other units in Holland, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Germany, Norway, Luxembourg, Denmark and Holland remain unnamed. Not least, the United Kingdom’s unit was simply known as “Stay Behind.”
“Finally, many people HAVE blabbed. David Schippers, Sibel Edmonds and Mike Springman, to name but three. We can also be confident that much of the information which solidifies our case — war games, for instance — was intentionally leaked to the press.
The idea that a high-ranking member of the government would call a press conference and blow the whistle is quite absurd. You don’t climb to the upper echolons of the US government by being a selfless patriot. ”
” Another point that needs to be hammered home with this silly argument is that black ops do not operate with “everyone in the know”. WE know this, of course, but many “journalists” have apparently not even studied the MO of intelligence agencies in any detail, or at least they pretend they haven’t. “Contracting out” for plausible deniability, rigid compartmentalization or “need to know”, strict hierarchies in the military command structure enforcing lock step obedience, brainwashing about the “greater good”, war games to conduit operations through complex bueracracies, not-so-subtle threats to witnesses and their families — there are many techniques that are utilized to keep the number of potetential whistleblowers extremely small. Those that DO blow the whistle are marginalized, smeared or ignored altogether.”
…
” When it comes to Gladio, although hundreds were indeed involved, most heads of state were not even aware what was going on. This shows the effectiveness of compartmentalization and subcontractors. Gladio also left a body trail; some of the murders were dramatized in Godfather III.”
Carrying on with some theorizing that blogger (Danse) states:
” My personal opinion is that it could have been pulled off with a few dozen. A far, far smaller number than involved in Gladio, in any case. Remote control + hijacking “drills” + subcontracted mercenary work (*ahem, Dancing Israelis) + clean up afterwards = success.
We actually have no idea how many intelligence officers/Pentagon personnel were killed as an insurance policy in conjunction with the attacks themsleves. Many of the war game participants involving drones were no doubt offed during the operation in order to cover the trail. Most spooks are not listed in the phone book.
There is a very important distinction to be made here, between those who actively participated in the operation and those who merely kept their mouths shut after the fact. We know that the latter number DOES involve “thousands” — every “journalist” who writes a hit piece, every person of stature exposed to the evidence who decides to ignore the 911 truth movement — there ARE thousands, even hundreds of thousands who have kept their mouths shut for very simple reasons relating to class and self-interest. Throw that back at one of these clowns the next time they talk about whistleblowers. “Well, you’ve kept your mouth shut, havent’ you”?
None of this is surprising in the slightest: the author of this piece himself is an accessory after the fact. Apparently the higher one’s “caste” in a hierarchical society, the more likely one is “play ball”. There are exceptions but they are few and far. Didn’t sociologists figure this out several hundred years ago?
It takes great courage to speak out against the big lie. If this sack-of-shit journalist can’t even do it, why does he expect the same of “junior intelligence officers”? ”
–
” Mr Dyer concedes “They were already planning to attack Iraq, as part of a larger plan, dating back to the late 1990s and the Project for a New American Century, to re-launch Pax America and re-establish American hegemony in the 21st-century world. I agree that they were adroit in seizing on 9/11 as a way of enlisting popular support for their project. But that’s all.”
Is this in itself not enough to ask for an investigation? ”
Is this in itself not enough to ask for an investigation!!!
” I have to admit that when looked at from his viewpoint the “alternative conspiracy theory” is difficult to buy. But so is the “official conspiracy.”
And insinuating that “the argument is pure paranoid fantasy and it is rotting people’s brains.” is an insult to the sane sensible people who can’t buy the official conspiracy theory and simply want answers.
Is that too much to ask Gwynne?????? ”
–
” Since when do accomplices for mass murder get fame and wealth for ratting out their fellow conspirators? maybe a reduced sentence… this Gwynne Dyer guy is funny.
“Not one of these 10,000 accomplices to mass murder has yielded to the temptation for instant fame and great wealth for blowing the whistle on the greatest conspiracy in history.” ”
—
Indeed.
Source: http://www.911blogger.com
March 19th, 2007 at 2:02 am
SHCB wrote, “the Saudi’s are doing a much better job of curbing the proliferation of terrorist enlistment and production in their nation.”
Again, hate to break it to ya SHCB, but there were way more terrorists in Saudia Arabia than Iraq prior to the invasion. Indeed, Saddam kept a pretty tight leash on is people. American targets have been attacked inside of Saudia Arabia and most of the 9/11 hijackers came from there.
Are you saying there were more reasons (legitimate ones!) to attack Iraq than Saudi Arabia? I think just the two I listed above warrant more of a response over anything Saddam ever did to the US.
The rest of your paragraph is too silly for a rebuttal. I am wondering if we are living on the same planet.
March 19th, 2007 at 5:14 am
NL,
I think your statement that there were more terrorists on Saudi land than Iraqi is probably true. So what. I think of the 20 some reasons Bush gave congress to go to war, there was only one or two that had to do with terrorists actually being in Iraq. The training camps where foreign fighters trained, many from Saudi Arabia I’m sure. The other reason was evidence of some collusion between Al Qaeda and Iraq.
This is a war, not a police action. We want to cripple the ability of the terrorists to attack us using whatever means at our disposal. We attacked Afghanistan to get the actual terrorists, we attacked Iraq to remove the threat of other terrorists acquiring WMDs, and we used threats and diplomacy to manage the threats of nations like Libya and Saudi Arabia.
None of this will make sense if you look at it from a law enforcement standpoint and just go after the actual people that perpetrate these attacks. The founding fathers recognized the differences of military and law enforcement and went to great lengths to separate them. That was part of the problem with the Katrina response time, Bush could not, by law, send in military forces without a request from the governor of Louisiana, and that did not come until the afternoon before the day of the evacuation of the Superdome.
Before you think of my idea’s as silly look at them from a perspective of us being in a war. You of course can still reject that we are at war, that’s ok, but maybe my points will make more sense.
I’m sure we are living on the same planet, you just choose to ignore a large part of it’s population that wants us to die.
shcb
March 19th, 2007 at 9:45 am
OK — again, I’ve gotta kill the bold. There. Please, if you’re gonna use HTML tags (in this case, TV) — please remember to close your tags. Otherwise, every subsequent post retains that tag (thanks to WordPress). Not to single out — it’s just something that annoys me. :)
March 19th, 2007 at 10:04 am
Ack, it’s still bold! Let’s see if this kills it>
March 19th, 2007 at 10:25 am
Hi SHCB,
You want to cripple the ability of the terrorists to attack you using everything at your disposal? Very worthwhile objective, but tell me: How can you ever accomplish that, when, on this the fourth anniversary, yes it’s been four years, the mighty US military can’t even secure the City of Baghdad?
See this is what I am talking about. Are we on different planets? What you seem to see this war as a sure-win-clear-strategy military campaign, I see as a massive failure that is actually creating more terrorists, not less, while at the same time is draining the US treasury and crippling its credibility.
As for your “20 some reasons” for war with Iraq, I remember being told one reason prior to invasion – one: WMD’s and the Armageddon that was sure to come.
Plenty of other reasons came after no evidence of WMD’s was ever found.
Please cite these 20 some “pre-invasion” reasons for war and provide links to the text of your sources. Ensure that all speeches/war rally’s were dated prior to March 19th 2003. Thanks.
Give peace a chance.
March 19th, 2007 at 12:00 pm
NorthLite, it’s sad that these Americans have bought into the idea that the whole world wants to attack them. That’s understandable since they live in a society where education and other social needs are woefully underfunded and the lobbying of their military industrial complex is so strong.
No wonder simple folk like SHCB believes they are in a War that will not end in their lifetime. By definition their’s is a violent society by way of its laws (Patriot Act), policies (Extraordinary rendition and torture), actions internally (elimination of the Posse Commitus Act, recuiter lying to youth, voterigging) and externally (installed Pinochet and the Shah of Iran. No wonder that TeacherVet can only feel safe in his backyard at night if he has a gun by his side and SHCB sleeps with a firearm.
If TeacherVet is a teacher as he claims, then he probably teaches gym (he never did answer that question but we can safely assume from his posts that it has nothing to do with Physics, math, Philosophy, Literature, psychology; and probably has something to do with battlefield strategy.)
Nevertheless, I hope his operation is a success and his recuperation allows him to reflect on the good things in life and that despite his life so far the good thing in life do not include war, supporting troops involved with an illegal 4 year occupation of another nation, or nuclear wapons (“depleted” or not).
TeacherVet, you also raise excellent points and are focused on the real issues.
SHCB and TV failed to examine how government /military / industrial/ corporate / media collude to control public opinion in Amerika to the point that the USA now resembles previous nations that have fallen into this trap (commonly known as fascism, no matter how it is defined).
As such, they fail to recognize that the information they base their arguments upon has been warped and twisted; and, they refuse to seriously consider points that threaten the core of their beliefs.
—
Which brings me back to Gwynne:
” I have to admit that when looked at from his [Gwynne’s] viewpoint the “alternative conspiracy theory” is difficult to buy. But so is the “official conspiracy.”
And insinuating that “the argument is pure paranoid fantasy and it is rotting people’s brains.” is an insult to the sane sensible people who can’t buy the official conspiracy theory and simply want answers.
Is that too much to ask Gwynne?????? ”
Support peace and enlightenment.
March 19th, 2007 at 1:14 pm
So I’m obviously coming into this conversation late in the game, but there have been a few points that sort of blew me away. Perhaps I’m taking this out of context, but TV’s finding that literature irrelevant is alarming to me. Of course the authors did not have the foresight to know exactly what has taken place in our modern world. However, we have to take into account that history has a tendency to repeat itself, and past responses to history should always be taken into account and related to the present. It really helps us learn something from history and gives us a real perspective. Otherwise, history will repeat itself, and we will not carry any past or present lessons from it. Our times and situation are not as unique as we may take for granted. Some literature is even more relevant now than it was at the time. (Right now, I’m thinking of the movie Brazil as particularly relevant…but I totally loved that movie anyway.) I say this outside of the context of any potential historical misquotes.
TV, I do share your suspicion of the 14 points of fascism, most being worded to reflect our current government. However, I do believe that we should examine our executive administration’s power grab and secrecy with extreme caution. Most of this is an attempt to regain power removed after abuses exposed during the Nixon administration, which includes an unnecessary bucking of the FISA act, which the Bush administration wished to completely bypass, even though FISA allowed for warrant-less surveillance with a warrant application happening after the actually surveillance. What I find particularly alarming is that many of the people in the GW Bush cabinet were also members of Nixon’s administration. These people were the reason for taking certain powers away from the executive branch. Now, those people want them back, and for secret reasons noless. Are we just supposed to believe them after what they put the country through 40 years ago?
KnarlyKnight, this is a really minor nitpick, and I’m really not picking on you here. Further, you don’t seem to do this as much as you used to, however, I believe that frequent use of the term Amerika is damaging to your argument as it exposes a predetermined bias. Not that expressing bias is a bad thing, and even as an American, I understand your frustration with the direction that my country has taken…but IMO, it’s similar to a term like Micro$oft, it’s often used by fanboys and tends to put people who use the term into the group of one fanboy or another. Again, I’m not so much taking a swipe at you, but it’s something to consider when participating in a discussion between people of contrasting viewpoints.
SHCB, from your first posts in this thread, I just can’t stop thinking “it depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is”. I asked this in another post. If we can’t agree on definition of the term lies, but can agree that there was a degree of deception, can we at least agree on the term “bullshit” (both the adjective and verb in the case of the case for war – please keep this picture in mind).
I’ve also gotta question actively whether we’re really at war. SHCB, you attest to this notion quite a few times, and I’m sure that this may the crux of our differing viewpoints. I’ve never really believed that the United States is really in a state of war. Yes, we have troops actively deployed who are under hostile fire. I’m not trying to denigrate our armed forces or their mission, and have openly discussed this with friends who are veterans of the current conflict and received varied opinions. From a historical context of war, this didn’t seem so disagreeable in our discussions. They also drew parallels to the Vietnam war, where their fathers had told them stories of not knowing who their enemies were, because VC soldiers didn’t wear uniforms and people who appeared to be ordinary citizens were terrorizing Vietnamese cities. But back to our state of war (and Iraq in particular), there was no declaration of war – I know that this has been danced around all over the place, but even after the excuses, this still doesn’t sit well with me that we remain ‘at war’ in an ad-hoc fashion without any articles of war issued. (I think that the US constitution is pretty clear on who may declare war, and how it may be declared). Secondly, I have a major problem with any war on a non-proper noun. Our wars on poverty and drugs have been horrible failures. The war on drugs being the more dismal of the two failures, and has largely been an idealistic exercise in steamrolling American civil liberties, and pissing all over foreign sovereignty. Furthermore, the war on drugs itself has provided a major source of funding for terrorists. Remember that if opium were legal, it would be far less profitable, and there would be some way to regulate who and where it comes from, as well as curbing the black-market price of opiates. The Taliban is regaining their foothold in Afghanistan because of their ability to profit from opium sales which would not have been as possible without our idealistic war on drugs. Also please take note that much of our war on drugs was initially pitched to the rest of the world by the American director of the federal bureau of narcotics, Harry Anslinger in the late 1920’s. Global drug policy might be very different if not for the efforts of the US government after the 20’s (this especially relates to cannabis-containing products which also profit that region of the world). I take issue with using the same terminology with our current national crisis – and I really wish that it only came down to nomenclature. It’s also in the execution of this ‘war’, as well as the wholesale micturation on American civil liberties (that most Americans weren’t aware of) as a means to an end. I think that ymatt made a very good point about retaining a stiff upper lip. We don’t have to let these terrorist shitheads win this war by destroying what I view as sacred rights which help make America the great place that it is.
I really wish that my objections were only based on terminology. However, we’re fighting a war with an undefined enemy, and with unclear goals (which may never be achieved, as the war itself tends to validate the acts of terrorism), that will occur over a seemingly infinite timeline. We’re also getting pretty wish-washy on some issues with deep ethical considerations; such as torture, ‘extraordinary rendition’, and habeus corpus. Furthermore, what has the average American actually sacrificed for the war on terror? Other than sacrificing a few civil liberties (which have not been temporarily revoked under any kind of martial law, but have been permanently removed as a matter of legislation) – is there any rationing, any draft, any major shift in our GDP allocation, or even something as obscure as war gardens? By the above metric, this appears to be less of a war than the Cold War was (which I suppose did have a number of military actions and blood shed, but thankfully, no major military conflict with our primary opponent, the USSR).
I’ll stop now, this is getting pretty long and is starting to sound like a rant…especially responding to old points this late in the discussion.
March 19th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
ethan-p: Interesting to hear your view.
I limit the use of “Amerika” to describe situations where civil liberties, freedoms and principles of America’s founding fathers seems to be trampled, or where an illegal meddling in another country has occurred. I do that in order not to tarnish the amazing shining beacon of hope that is America.
Minor errata in your post – The Taliban eradicated something like 98% of Afghan poppy harvest in their final years in power (mostly to starve the northern warlords of income for their resistance & because drugs clashed with their religious ideals). That might be the only good thing that those guys ever did. The irony is that under USA & allies “control”, the poppy crop is back to all time highs, and the Taliban now contribute to it to help fund their resistance (proving they are not as scrupulous as they professed to be when in power.)
–
As for the topic,
” Mr Dyer concedes “They were already planning to attack Iraq, as part of a larger plan, dating back to the late 1990s and the Project for a New American Century, to re-launch Pax America and re-establish American hegemony in the 21st-century world. I agree that they were adroit in seizing on 9/11 as a way of enlisting popular support for their project. But that’s all.”
Is this in itself not enough to ask for an investigation? ”
Is this in itself not enough to ask for an investigation!!!
Peace
March 19th, 2007 at 4:47 pm
fascism, despotism, totalitarianism… how low can The Deciderator go?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7jGZkaNTa8
from 1946
we are sliding towards the abyss…
I have very little confidence in the Democratic leadership to reverse this Republican trend. Terrorism is up nearly 7X around the globe, and the tattered lies that brought us to Iraq have made our fight against a very small percentage of a certain religion a colossal failure. Heck of a job bushco.
March 19th, 2007 at 5:39 pm
SHCB, TV and the other proles feel safer fighting, ahem “terrorists”, in Iraq.
If America actually lived in a world full of enemies, now is the time for the rest of the world to attack America:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/18/AR2007031801534_pf.html
Feel safe now? Don’t worry, that ain’t going to happen. Russia, Iran, China and the rest of the world are not going to attack you now that you are weakened militarily (unless your Leaders open the nuclear pandora’s box then all bets are off.) The world’s people understand how you people have been misled by your government and media. We feel sorry for what you have lost, and will feel sorry for you when you realize it yourself.
The enemies of your country are within.
You can turn your country’s destiny upwards again by opening your eyes and conducting a real investigation into 911. http://www.physics911.net/closerlook
And supporting peace in whatever you do.
Because this is what war achieves
A nation in ruins
2,000,000 Iraqis now live outside Iraq, according to UNHCR
12,000 doctors have fled Iraq since the war began. Another 2,000 are said to have been killed, and at least 250 kidnapped
50% Average inflation in 2006, according to the World Bank
6.3 hours of electricity daily in Baghdad in December 2006. In May 2003 there were 16-24 hours
32 percentage of people in Iraq with drinkable water
3,700,000 Iraqis now receive food aid from the UN World Food Programme
16% Proportion of Iraqis who said in January that their income meets their basic needs
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2369003.ece#2007-03-18T00:00:04-00:00
March 19th, 2007 at 7:18 pm
Hi NL,
Here is a link to the Wikipedia article of the joint resolution, there is a link at the bottom of the page with the actual text of the bill. This resolution was passed into law (107-243, 116 Stat. 1497-1502) , not a speech, not a toothless non binding resolution. This was passed by both houses on 10 October 2002 with about a 60% and 75% margin, not exactly a party line vote. This was a year after 911, long enough for congress to vet arguments for and against invasion, and long enough for the anger and knee jerk reactions to die down, and almost a half year before the invasion. Included in this article is a roll call of the vote.
Also is a link to UN resolution 1441 that warns Iraq to disarm or face the consequences, this was signed on 8 November 2002, it passed 15 zip.
It now makes some sense why you think Bush has created an “illegal” war if you didn’t know these laws had been passed. I’m going to gloss over most of the rest of you and Knarley’s posts because I think many of your obvious questions will be answered by my responses to Ethan, If I miss anything, as always, I will be happy to respond to legitimate questions or remarks. Thanks for having me guys, this is fun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Resolution_to_Authorize_the_Use_of_United_States_Armed_Forces_Against_Iraq
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Security_Council_Resolution_1441
March 19th, 2007 at 9:04 pm
Hi Ethan,
Your post has many interesting topics, I don’t know how many I can get to, I need to sleep sometime tonight, I think I will touch on the points I agree with you to whittle the task down some. So this won’t follow your text exactly.
I think TV may have made the comment of literature being irrelevant in a fit of passion, but we’ll let him explain himself when he gets better. By the way, kudos’ to John for wishing him well. I am reading a study of Sun Tzu and Sun Pin focusing primarily on The Art of War with a little of Military Methods. While these works were written 2500 years ago many of the concepts are as true today as then. I also agree with you on the 14 points of fascism. Looking at the word fascism in a dictionary, there are two phases for lack of a better word, economic and social, the right and left can reasonably claim the other is guilty of fascist acts. The religious right is socially fascist and the left is in many ways economically fascist for instance. We can get into more of that later, that may be a good subject for a new thread.
I am not opposed to legalizing drugs either. If I were king I would strike all federal drug laws and pardon everyone in prison on drug charges unless those charges involved violence, and those I would review. I am a big states rights advocate, so I would turn those laws over to the states. Let 50 little test tubes work out the best compromise. I think cannabis should be right next to the Jack Daniels, don’t see the difference. Coke needs further regulation, maybe let the free market regulate it by taxing the hell out of it. Never thought you’d hear a right winger say that did you? I don’t know about the other drugs but I’m open to discussion. I would also legalize prostitution over a certain age.
I think my lie analogy at the top of this page is pretty good, good enough to be reprinted in total on at least one other blog without my prodding in any way.
I cringe every time I hear George Bush call this conflict “the war on terror”. Tim McVeigh was a terrorist, but we aren’t at war with him or the other idiots in Montana that have stolen conservatism like these Arab idiots have stolen Islam. The boys in Montana are a small enough threat that police can handle it. Terror is a tactic, we are at war with someone who wants us to be controlled by them or wants us dead, doesn’t matter which. Knarley and I had a discussion as to what they should be called, he never did tell me term he preferred by the way. I don’t care what they are called just not terrorist. Terrorism will never end, poverty will never end, there will always be a child left behind…. I hate that shit. Words have meaning. Don’t know about you, but I feel better.
Now to the contentious point, “are we at war”. I’ve gone over this several times, on this and other threads so I will try and not repeat myself much. I think we are just talking about degree. You and I are on the same page when we want to use history to our advantage to not repeat history. You are also right that this war is not a ‘big’ war, that is the point, I would like to get it under control to the point that police can handle isolated incidents as a crime before we are talking double digit millions of lives lost. World War II taught us that.
This conflict has some similarities to Viet Nam, it is asymmetric warfare against an enemy that doesn’t play by the rules. History also shows what will happen if we leave too soon. 1 million dead. Timeframes, I didn’t write this anywhere, and I can’t prove I said this, so take it with a grain of salt, but when this Iraqi campaign started I said we would be there between 3 and 8 years when folks said we would be out of there in a year. I’m no prophet, that is just how long most wars of this type take. We will then have a presence in Iraq for the next 20 to 40 years. It takes 1 to 2 generations for the hatred these things produce to work its way out. Some of our guys will marry Iraqi women, have kids and those kids will play with native Iraqi kids, they will marry, and it will be over. I wish it didn’t take that long, but it seems it always does. History, it sucks sometimes.
As to this not being a declared war, I wish we did still declare war, it was a more honest way to let folks know you were coming after them. I heard a discussion as to the reason we don’t formally declare war, it has to do with international law. Kind of like we call them ‘a person of interest’ not a ‘suspect’. The resolution in the post to NL is as close as we will get this time. This is a war against an enemy that obviously came from somewhere, but fights for no one country, is supported by someone, but no one country, that fights in one country but hides in another that may or may not officially harbor these fighters. The closest we have come to this kind of fight is our declaring war on the Pirates of the Barbary coast in the early 1800’s.
It’s late and I don’t have the energy to look up the exact quote but Winston Churchill said something to the effect of “when a civilized nation goes to war against an uncivilized people they will by necessity loose part of their soul”. I don’t like the torture either, I hope we can regain some of our lost soul after this is over.
Pray for all of us, especially the troops.
Good night all.
March 19th, 2007 at 10:16 pm
KnarlyKnight,
I have different information about the Taliban. I could be wrong, and cannot cite this, but from what I understand about the Taliban, they actually stockpiled the opium in order to inflate the price of their stockpile. This not only helped to fund the Taliban, but helped to shift the power from the northern warlords.
SHCB,
It’s way too late for me to put an intelligent response together. I’ll try to put something together tomorrow after work, but I’ll put a brief response together before I crash. I think that we may come to discover that our politics are closer than it immediately seems (although our views definitely seem to differ with regards to president Bush). Perhaps it has to do with the fact that I don’t consider myself much of a liberal or a conservative, and have libertarian leanings. …but not Libertarian enough to jump on the bus that wants completely eliminate the federal government out the window and hand a metric buttload of guns to every man, woman, and child.
I tend to agree with most of your points, particularly the fact that the Iraq war will take at least as long as you suggest, and history will take a few decades (at a minimum) to be able to accurately judge the outcome (as well as any benefits or drawbacks for either side). I do want to point this out, however, that in similar occupations, America and her allies have had God on their side. I’m not suggesting that there was any kind of divine intervention, I don’t believe in such things. Instead, we largely shared religious beliefs with the Germans. Further, we faced a common enemy whom the United States misjudged during WWII, the Russians. The German was nothing like the occupation of Iraq, especially with regard to the growing insurgency. In the case of the Japanese occupation; when Hirohito surrendered, it was as if god had announced he were only a man. I’m not suggesting that there was not unrest in post-war Japan, but from what I understand, it was very mild compared to what we’re experiencing in Iraq.
In Iraq, we’re seeing the result of a vast cultural divide that I am afraid will not be bridged in the manner that you suggest. I’m don’t share your optimism that we will ever see the generation of Iraqis that your suggest. Perhaps I’m being short-sighted, or don’t share your patient attitude. But then again, it’s easy to lose sight of the goals of a war that (I feel) I was being deliberately mislead about from the start. Further, after learning of the ideals that this war is actually based upon, I still can’t support it.
I’m not surprised about your feelings about drug prohibition. You’ve professed yourself as a states rights advocate before. In any case, I’ve said before that if anyone legalizes drugs, it will probably be Republicans…
…if they can ever gather their party back together and then spend less time worrying about issues that please the social conservatives so they can get back on the (abandoned) small government agenda.
Oh crap, this turned into an entire post and it’s after 2 AM. I’ll get more into this tomorrow, I’m hosed.
‘night, suckas
March 20th, 2007 at 12:35 am
ethan-p,
out of idle curiousity, I looked into Taliban poppy production. Wiki writers did not agree with your recollection nor mine. They say the Taliban destroyed the poppy crop under orders from their mafia supporters. I recall reports on the Taliban before 911 saying that they eliminated the crop as they became drunk with power and increasingly agressively asserted their fundamental religious beliefs. A quick review of news reports from the era fall in the middle, with western diplomats aka spooks claiming the Taliban were stockpiling. Since the West has beaten the Taliban so far, perhaps it is the West that gets to write the history in Wiki now. It gets fascinating. Here is a snippet from a Feb. 2001 news report (source: http://opioids.com/afghanistan/index.html ):
Mullah Amir Mohammed Haqqani, the Taliban’s top drug official in Nangarhar, said the ban would remain regardless of whether the Taliban received aid or international recognition. “It is our decree that there will be no poppy cultivation. It is banned forever in this country,” he said. “Whether we get assistance or not, poppy growing will never be allowed again in our country.
And if you are interested in the topic, this is excellent: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/EI17Ag01.html
–
SHCB, I can’t believe I agreed with most of your last post. Also, I thought I noticed some Sun Tzu tactics in your posts! Maybe there is hope for you yet.
March 20th, 2007 at 1:32 am
First, a little humour from someone funnier than me, lamenting the proles comments on this news item: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article1530527.ece
Defend ourselves from what? We created the hatred for the USA and have been for a decade in our grab for land and resources. Stop watching Faux news. Bush is an idiot. You need to worry about putting food on your family.
DonD, lusby, MD
–
SHCB, I will let NorthernLite dispute whether or not the link you gave satisfied his claim that the administrations sole rationale for invading Iraq was WMD; but, by my count of the 20 resolutions it all boiled down to about three issues.
A dozen or more resolutions related to the bogus WMD claims (including the WMD references that were masked behind UN resolutions), and most of the remaining relate to bogus claims of supporting terrorists (Saddam did provide small donations to widows or mothers of Palestinian suicide bombers, but that is not really threatening to the USA), and I forget what the third theme was and I am not going to look it up again.
By the way, do not place too much faith in UN resolutions on this issue, the US administration used very strong economic and military threats and incentives to coerce passage of those resolutions. There was a lot coverage about this in the international press.
It is fascinating for me to see the number of those joint resolutions that were blatently bogus to any thinking person at the time who had access to independent news reports. Thanks for the link SHCB! Friendly advice? You need to read between the lines a little more, perhaps Bush hasn’t read Sun Tzu but some of his advisors likely have. Good luck SHCB.
—
A short cut/paste that is germain to discussions above.
Says 60% of Iraqi’s support attacks on US troops:
Most Iraqis want USA to Leave!
Michael Collins
“Scoop” Independent News
Washington, D.C.
You may have missed this. I did.
Most Iraqis Favor Immediate U.S. Pullout, Polls Show
Leaders’ Views Out of Step With Public
By Amit R. Paley
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 27, 2006; A22
BAGHDAD, Sept. 26 — A strong majority of Iraqis want U.S.-led military forces to immediately withdraw from the country, saying their swift departure would make Iraq more secure and decrease sectarian violence, according to new polls by the State Department and independent researchers.
The White House maintained only one consistent goal throughout the invasion and occupation of Iraq: safety and democracy for the Iraqi people. That implies that we care what the Iraqi people think. Heard much about what the Iraqi people think lately? Ever?
The rest is at: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0703/S00319.htm
–
I wonder why Gwynne Dyer did not talk about this issue:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2073592843640256739
The whole video is good, but Do not miss the segment on Mr. Jowenko starting at about 12:40 mark.
Do not miss the segment on Mr. Jowenko starting at about 12:40 mark.
Do not miss the segment on Mr. Jowenko starting at about 12:40 mark.
–
March 20th, 2007 at 4:50 am
hey Knarley, great minds think alike :)
March 20th, 2007 at 5:10 am
Hi SHCB, the links you provided are not “20 some other reasons for invasion”. They are the WMD reason.
The links you provided are for him to disarm his WMD, but there was a small problem with that. He didn’t have any WMD to disarm! Why that’s so hard for some people to understand is I just don’t get. It’s like telling me to put down my weapon or you’ll shoot me, but I don’t have a weapon to put down. So you shoot me anyways.
I’m still waiting for the pre-March 19/03 “20 other noble reasons” for invasion.
*crickets*
March 20th, 2007 at 5:11 am
Sorry Knarley, I read your posts out of order, your fist one makes many good points, none of knows what the future will bring, we give it our best shot and soon the future becomes history and we use that history to predict the future, got to go to work, I have a wedding to pay for.
Pleasant dreams my friend
March 20th, 2007 at 7:12 am
Knarly,
Thanks — I stand corrected.
March 20th, 2007 at 8:51 am
gee 1984 seems to be in the news of late.
Someone mashed up the Apple 1984 ad with some Hillary video.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200703200002
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h3G-lMZxjo
The funny part is Mann Coulter saying “I don’t know how anyone can vote for a Democrat after reading Orwell’s 1984.”
Literature (including religious literature) is the very foundation of civilization. It doesn’t surprise me at all that the Rs reflexively dismiss any opponent’s reference to literature in ‘debate’. And yet they revere a 3rd rate actor (ronny raygun), a tv show like 24 (which openly condones torture and shows it working every time, sheesh) and the bizarre fiction that w is even remotely competent (clearly not fit for command).
March 20th, 2007 at 11:59 am
Re: Mann Coulter’s comments, “I don’t know how anyone can vote for a Democrat after reading Orwell’s 1984.”
Actually it’s pretyy easy to vote Democrat (or Liberal). They don’t call people faggots or bomb innocent civilians. For that alone, they get my vote!
March 20th, 2007 at 7:51 pm
Hi guys,
Well, it seems I misspoke, I used the wrong word when I said there were twenty some reasons given in the Joint Resolution. It would have been more accurate to say that of the twenty or so where as’ or items, there were a number of reasons given other than WMD’s. I haven’t read the Joint Resolution in a while since this is kind of old news. Conservatives effectively refuted these charges many months, maybe years ago. Upon review, there were 23 where as’; 1 platitudinous statement, 8 WMD, 1 humanitarian, 2 collusion with terrorists, 2 terrorism ties, 1 removal of Sadam, 4 violation of UN resolutions, and 4 national security issues. So six or seven reasons, not twenty, but certainly more than 1.
You’re right, he didn’t have as much WMD material as we thought, and the stuff we knew without a doubt he had wasn’t there either. But, you know how we know that now? Because US Marines did the inspections. The UN inspectors had been stymied for years. They didn’t have the unlimited access the ceasefire called for, Sadam told them when and where they could inspect, the UN security council didn’t push the issue since three of the permanent members were on the take. Even our spy planes had to set up an appointment 48 hours in advance and give the flight path before we could fly over Iraq if we didn’t want to get shot at. Our war planes were shot at on a regular basis in the no fly zone. He wasn’t cooperating. See my description of South Africa above. The future is easy to predict when it is in the past.
You guys keep bringing up we are producing more terrorists. I believe I gave this analogy in another thread, so at the risk of repeating myself; if there are 1000 enemy fighters attacking your forces, and you kill 200, inciting anger sufficient to get 500 more to fight, you simply have to deal with 1300. Your only alternative is to be overrun by the original 1000. Besides, chances are the new 500 aren’t as tough or as devoted as the original 1000 or they would have joined from the start.
So you got me on the twenty reasons, there were only 6 or 7…. Still haven’t had an example of a lie that Bush told. Remember, has to be an untruth, he had to know it was an untruth when he told it, and it had to be told with malicious intent.
March 20th, 2007 at 8:38 pm
Your count of the Wheras’ are wrong. there are about 1 dozen that tie to bogus WMD issues.
Your information about the effectiveness of weapons inspections is right for short periods of time, totally wrong for most of the time inspections were proceeding (read Hans Blix reports, that is right oin the money.)
Terrorists were not coming from Iraq. So to use your analogy, it is more like start with zero terrorists from Iraq, invade the ountry with shock and awe, so then you have 10000 – 50000 potential terrorists, then continue to screw up and treat the Iraqi’s like ragheads and over 4 years you now have 6-0% of the population (what’s that? maybe 14,000,000 million people who want to killl American troops and perhaps 10% or 1,400,000 motivated enough to conduct a terrorist act not on your troops but on any American.
Not sure what all that has to do with Dyer on Loose Change
This does though:
BUSH PROMOTES MORE FEAR FOR AMERICANS (so much for the optimism, eh TeacherVet?)
Submitted by GeorgeWashington on Tue, 03/20/2007 – 4:06pm.
Bush: Iraq Pullout could Spark Repeat of 9/11
President Bush said today that pulling out of Iraq could spark a repeat of 9/11.
President George W Bush used the fourth anniversary of the start of the Iraq war yesterday to warn that US withdrawal would unleash a “contagion of violence” that could spark a repeat of the September 11 attacks.
***
Democratic proposals for deadlines for troop withdrawals, he suggested, could be “devastating” for America’s security and could help al-Qa’eda plan attacks against the United States on a scale not seen since Sept 11.
***
“The terrorists could emerge from the chaos with a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they had in Afghanistan, which they used to plan the attacks of September 11th 2001. For the safety of the American people, we cannot allow this to happen.”
—-> I think the Iraqis will have enough on their plates just getting their toilets to flush again after all the American bombs.
And then there is this that never makes it into the NY TIMES:
Street-Level Explosion Before Collapse of WTC 1
Witness
Here’s an interesting eyewitness report about a large explosion at ground level right before the collapse of the North Tower. The witness is apparently a New Jersey musician.
“I’m not a conspiracy theorist; I don’t go in for that junk. I’m very patriotic, and I believe in my elected officials — I even write songs about them. But nothing said in the official (and largely unpublicised) story about the cause of the collapse of World Trade Center Seven jibes with what we witnessed that day. If the government story of the events at the Twin Towers have always seemed fishy and incomplete, I know damned well the few official accounts of the collapse of Building Seven are fishy and incomplete.
***
Just before the fall of the North Tower, we saw a large explosion coming from the street-level area around World Trade Center 7. I remember thinking that it looked distinctly like a bomb had been detonated underneath the city, and, of course, that’s exactly what I thought had occurred.
http://web.archive.org/web/20040412230000/http://www.trismccall.net/jersey_city_journal.html
March 20th, 2007 at 11:47 pm
Dyer must not have known about these facts when he wrote his emotionally charged article. Link to original article’s working links are at the bottom of this post.
WAR GAMES ON SEPTEMBER 11TH
On the very morning of 9/11/01, five war games and terror drills were being conducted by several U.S. defense agencies, including one “live fly” exercise using REAL planes. Then-Acting Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General Richard B. Myers, admitted to 4 of the war games in congressional testimony — see transcript here or video here (6 minutes and 12 seconds into the video).
As stated above, NORAD ran drills for years of planes being used as weapons against the World Trade Center and other U.S. high-profile buildings, “numerous types of civilian and military aircraft were used as mock hijacked aircraft”, and at least some of the drills used REAL AIRCRAFT simulating terrorist attacks crashing jets into buildings, including the twin towers.
Indeed, a former Los Angeles police department investigator, whose newsletter is read by 45 members of congress, both the house and senate intelligence committees, and professors at more than 40 universities around the world, claims that he obtained an on-the-record confirmation from NORAD that on the very morning of 9/11 itself, NORAD and the Joint Chiefs of Staff were conducting a joint, live-fly, hijack exercise which involved government-operated aircraft POSING AS HIJACKED AIRLINERS.
On September 11th, the government also happened to be running a simulation of a plane crashing into a building.
In addition, a December 9, 2001 Toronto Star article reprinted here, stated that “Operation Northern Vigilance is called off. Any simulated information, what’s known as an ‘inject,’ is purged from the screens”. This indicates that there were false radar blips inserted onto air traffic controllers’ screens as part of the war game exercises.
Moreover, there are indications that some of the major war games previously scheduled for October 2001 were MOVED UP to September 11th by persons unknown (first paragraph).
Interestingly, Vice President Cheney was apparently in charge of ALL of the war games and coordinated the government’s “response” to the attacks. See this CNN article; and this previously-cited essay.
And while the government has consistently stated that it did not know where the aircraft were before they struck, this short video clip of the Secretary of Transportation’s testimony before the 9/11 Commission shows that Cheney monitored flight 77 for many miles as it approached the Pentagon. How could one of the most heavily-defended buildings in the world have been successfully attacked, when the Vice President of the United States, in charge of counter-terrorism on 9/11, watched it approach from many miles away?
Additionally, this diagram shows that the hijacked planes flew over numerous military bases on 9/11 before crashing. See also this essay about the war games; this essay regarding the stand down of the military; and see this war game proposal created before 9/11 revolving around Bin Laden and including “live-fly exercises” involving real planes, later confirmed by this official Department of Defense website.
Indeed, a person who worked inside the Pentagon for the army, and who was seriously injured in, but survived, the Pentagon attack, implies that the Pentagon’s normal anti-aircraft defenses would have had to be disabled for the attack to succeed.
Which scenario is more likely from a strictly logistical perspective:
(1) An outsider sitting in a cave defeating the air defense system of the sole military superpower; or
(2) Someone like Cheney — who on 9/11 apparently had full control over all defense, war game and counter-terrorism powers — rigging and gaming the system?
Remember that for the attacks to have succeeded, it was necessary that actions be taken in the middle of the war games and the actual attacks which would thwart the normal military response. For example, Cheney watched flight 77 approach the Pentagon from many miles out, but instructed the military to do nothing (as shown in the testimony of the Secretary of Transportation, linked above). Could Bin Laden have done that?
Fighter jets were also sent far off-course over the Atlantic Ocean in the middle of the attacks (testimony of Senator Mark Dayton), so as to neutralize their ability to intercept the hijacked airliners. Could Osama Bin Laden and his sent-from-the-cave band of followers have exercised this degree of control over the military? Obviously not.
And air traffic controllers claim they were still tracking what they thought were hijacked planes long after all 4 of the real planes had crashed. This implies that false radar blips remained on their screens after all 4 planes went down, long after the military claims they purged the phantom war-game-related radar signals. Could Bin Laden have interfered with the full purging of false radar blips inserted as part of the war games? In other words, could Bin Laden have overridden the purging process so that some false blips remained and confused air traffic controllers? The answer is clear.
It is more likely that Cheney and/or other high-level U.S. government and military officials pulled the 9/11 trigger than that Bin Laden did it. At the very least, they took affirmative steps to guarantee that the hijackers’ attacks succeeded.
But don’t take our word for it. A former air traffic controller said that that 9/11 was an inside job and that Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon tracked three of the four flights from the point of their hijacking to hitting their targets.
And, as discussed previously, a former air force colonel and director of the Star Wars program stated “If our government had merely done nothing, and allowed normal procedures to happen on that morning of 9/11, the twin towers would still be standing, and thousands of dead Americans would still be alive. [T]hat is treason”
http://911proof.com/9.html
IF you have other objections to 911 Truth, they probably have already been addressed, here: http://www.911proof.com/
March 21st, 2007 at 2:23 pm
Hi SHCB,
I don’t agree with your weapons inspection point.
The UN Inspector’s were saying repeatedly that they weren’t finding anything substantial, but also asking for a little more time to keep searching.
Because they were right, you’re saying they were wrong. I don’t understand?
I know it sucks when you are proven wrong, but it happens. When you try to change history however, you begin to run the risk of sounding foolish.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:58 pm
NorthernLite,
It is clear that SHCB is not concerned about sounding foolish.
He’s saying that because Bush reported, in year two or so of their occupation, that they found a mobile biochem weapons lab (was a big news story in the states) and then it was later admitted by the military that the trailer was for some other purpose (small story on page 8 or 9 in most newspapers)… he’s saying that in his mind there really were WMD’s in Iraq. Besides, Bush says the UN weapons inspectors were being totally stymied so therefore in SHCB’s mind, such as it is, even though the UN inspectors said things were progressing fine damnit let us do our job, the AMerican had to bomb the hell out of the country and destroy the infrastructure (not the oil facilities though) in order to acheive a military victory and find the WMD’s. So SHCB, where are the WMD’s, and I am not talking about the wasted out drums of poison gas supplied to Saddam in the 1980’s, since those have a shelf life of only a few years anyway. And the nuclear facilities, where are they? We got Saddam’s leading nuclear scientist in Toronto (have you seen the 5th Estate video yet SHCB) sying the uclear program was killed in 1990-91 with gulf war 1 and didn’t have any hope of starting up again, but that news doesn’t serve the neo-cons purpose now does it?
—
And what about Dyer on 911? How’s this for another opinion, from someone a little closer to the actin than Gwynne:
Former CIA official supports Professor’s claim that official 9/11 Islamist conspiracy theory are lies –
strong body of evidence showing the official U.S. Government story of what happened on September 11, 2001 to be almost certainly a monstrous series of lies. Tragically, the entire course of U.S. foreign and domestic policies since that date has grown out of these almost certain falsehoods,” says Bill Christison, former senior official of the CIA.
Mr. Christison further indicates that, “This single book could (and should) provide the basis for the United Nations International Court of Justice, or some specially constituted global body (independent of the U.S.) to investigate with highest priority, and publicly report its findings about, the charge that unknown elements within the U.S. Government, and possibly some individuals elsewhere closely allied to the U.S., caused or contributed to causing the events of September 11 to happen.”
Full story at:
http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2007/03/21/01412.html
March 22nd, 2007 at 4:21 am
Hi NL,
I think I probably just didn’t explain myself well. I am more comfortable and practiced in a one on one discussion of these issues. This is a harder forum for me because I try and not repeat myself any more than needed. I find repeating yourself bad form. In this forum, however, it is hard to remember what you said to whom when. These discussions occur over several days or weeks with people coming and going, similar discussions on several threads etc. To make matters worse my little pea brain tends to remember segments of different discussions as one item. So I probably truncated my response thinking you could fill in the blanks from a previous discussion. A discussion I more than likely had with someone else. So let me try again.
With the unlikely exception of a Hitler like massive bunker filled to the brim with nuclear warheads and sophisticated nerve agents being found well hidden in the desert, we, (Bush, myself and most conservatives) were wrong. The inspectors were right. I’m just saying given what we knew then, we were still justified using WMD as a reason to invade Iraq.
Allow me an analogy of our view of what happened. There are three players in this story, a smallish police officer 110 pounds or so, that for whatever reason isn’t allowed to carry a weapon. He is a combination of the inspectors and the UN security council, I say a combination because in this story he takes a bribe, and I don’t for a moment want to insinuate the inspectors were anything but honorable folks doing a nearly impossible job with little resources. Members of the security council weren’t as lily white, but splitting them into two characters makes this story to convoluted. The second player is a 300 pound madam, owner of a house of ill repute. This represents Sadam, a pretty disturbing image, don’t you think. The third player is a gung ho police captain with a SWAT team.
Our officer enters the parlor of the brothel with the intention of arresting the madam, she explains that she no longer deals in sexual pleasures and the lovely ladies sitting in the parlor are just friends having tea and crumpets. He reports to his captain there is no evidence of prostitution. The captain sends him back the following day to check the house more thoroughly. The officer demands to see the bedrooms upstairs, the madam takes him to a door and shows him an empty room. He asks to see another room, the madam agrees to his request, he is escorted back to the parlor where a couple of the girls make him VERY comfortable while the madam goes upstairs. A half hour later he is shown the room he requested, empty of course. When he hears what happened at the house the captain explodes, berating the poor officer for not inspecting all the rooms. The officer explains that he had little choice given the disparity of size of himself and the madam. The captain marshals his SWAT team, they break down all the doors of the house only to find that indeed the girls were just visiting. The rooms upstairs were not being used for prostitution, but were being used to produce knockoff Rolex watches.
Now was the captain justified in raiding the house since what he was looking for wasn’t there? All the indications were that prostitution was taking place, scantily clad women, many ornately decorated bedrooms, a fat old woman with young, beautiful friends that were overly friendly, and a reluctance to prove to the authorities her innocence. The only evidence that prostitution wasn’t taking place was the report of an officer that wasn’t being given full access. The fact that another crime was being committed is secondary but not totally irrelevant.
I don’t know why Sadam didn’t let the inspectors do their jobs, one theory is he didn’t want his enemies in the area to know how impotent he really was, my personal favorite is he really didn’t know he didn’t have anything. You have to remember most of his inner circle were chosen primarily because they were family and he trusted them, not that they had expertise in their areas of responsibility. I can see one of his cousins being put in charge of producing a nerve agent and the poor schmuck not having a clue as to how to do it. But he is given a huge budget, so he puts together a staff and a laboratory. After a couple years they are no closer to producing a product that they were when they started. So ole cuz goes to the black market with a little of his budget and buys a sample of the real stuff, fills a couple large tanks with some obnoxious but harmless fluid. When Sadam shows up for a test with a couple political enemies in shackles, the cousin sprays the real chemical on the poor saps and the gathered crowd of cronies cheer as the prisoners thrash about as they die a brutal death. Sadam slaps the relative on the back and goes home thinking he has 1500 gallons of the stuff when in reality his entire stockpile was depleted with the death of those two poor souls. The cousin then spends the rest of his time producing the worthless liquid, keeping just enough of the real stuff around in case the maniac or his sons want to impress their friends or enemies.
Unfortunately, we would have let him drop people into shredders for a long time if he would only have complied with the cease fire agreement.
As to the inspectors needing more time, they had 12 years, how much more time did they need? A week, two, maybe another decade?
So because we were wrong, doesn’t mean we were right, but I also doesn’t mean we made the wrong decision. There are the ramifications of being wrong to consider as well. Looking at this issue from 2002, if we were wrong and the inspectors were right, predictions were we would loose 10,000 men and look like buffoons. Luckily only one of those predictions came true. If on the other hand, the inspectors were wrong and we were right, hundreds of thousands of Americans and Europeans could be dead and our economies a shambles. Sometimes you make the wrong choice for the right reasons.
Hope that helps.
ps knarley,
I heard an interview with an Iraqi nuclear guy, maybe the same guy, who said exactly what you said about the 90-91 timeframe, exept he added that Sadam had planned to restart the program after santions were lifted. I heard that interview in progress, real time. maybe it was a different guy, maybe he changes his story to suit his listeners, or maybe someone only gave you half the story.
March 22nd, 2007 at 12:11 pm
SHCB, you are a good storyteller, but I do not think your analogy fits very well. Let’s not waste space debating that.
It is emotionally compelling to state that “if the inspectors were wrong and we were right, hundreds of thousands of Americans and Europeans could be dead and our economies a shambles”. Those types of statements hold sway in the media and public opinion, but would be torn to pieces by any first year philosophy student who had passed a logic course. More importantly, that statement does not reflect the real world.
Assume for a moment that Saddam had the means, motive and opportunity to direct such weapons against the USA or Europe – why did he not use them when attacked in Gulf War One instead of letting the Iraqi weapons cache deteriorate over 12 years of economic and military sanctions? Why did he not use them at any time up to his ouster and execution? The answer is that doing so would have wrought swift and brutal retaliation. Using WMD against America or Europe would have been insane; and, despite your Leader’s characterizations he was not a madman. Remember, that is assuming he even had the means, motive or opportunity which he did not. In other words, you have fallen for the LIES perpetrated upon you to instill the FEAR that conditions you to support your Leader and stop critical thinking.
However, you do parrot republican talking points very well (“Sometimes you make the wrong choice for the right reasons”) so you might yet get a good job assessment from your superior at the CIA Disinformation Unit where it is becoming increasingly clear that you work (because it is impossible to believe that you are as dumb or misguided as your statements and analogies.) Also, you might get a gold star for diverting discussion from our topic (Gwynne Dyer slams the Loose Change video and shows a total misunderstanding of the 911 Truth Movement.)
–
I hear Charlie Sheen is going to narrate the Loose Change Final Cut video. He has so much courage facing all the personal attacks he has faced because he has dared to publicly question the government’s 911 conspiracy theory.
After hearing him repeatedly say “answer the 911 questions or debate me on the facts” (paraphrased) it is funny (in a sad way) to see barely any consideration of the questions.
And it is funny (in a sad way) to see disgustingly blatant hit pieces (attacking Sheen’s personality and reputation) that are designed by the mainstream media to influence public opinion through emotions rather than substance: http://www.nypost.com/seven/03222007/gossip/pagesix/pagesix.htm
Most people refuse to consider a 911 conspiracy that might involve neo-cons in the US government because they are conditioned to think that something like that could not happen in America and that you’d have to be part of the loony brigade to even ask a question that suggests that it might. (Those people have willingly forfeited their liberty to think for themselves, and have succumbed to emotional manipulation.)
For anyone who thinks that such manipulation is not taking place in American media (and perhaps even in blogs like this one), please consider the information at the links that are described on this webpage: http://911proof.com/3.html
http://911proof.com/3.html
March 22nd, 2007 at 12:17 pm
Errata: near end of my last post (or the submitted post that wil pop up soon) I meant to say “Most OF THE people” not “Most people”, because 84% of Americans now believe their government is lying about 911.
March 22nd, 2007 at 12:56 pm
For what it’s worth, the reason your comments keep getting held in the moderation queue is that they contain 3 or more links. If you only put 2 links in a comment, it should go right through.
March 22nd, 2007 at 4:12 pm
thanks jbc.
just wondering do you know if anyone else is reading this thread besides you, me, NL, shcb ekidinu p-ethan and tv? I’m thinking it is not worth my time, as I’m not getting paid for this & it’s not my country we’re talking about here anyway.
March 22nd, 2007 at 4:23 pm
At this point I think it would be very unlikely that anyone other than the participants is reading it. That isn’t to say that no one ever will, but for myself, I’d say you should only put as much time into it as you feel is justified by whatever reward you get from the act of putting your views out there.
It’s a truism of these online debates that pretty much no one’s mind is ever changed. The participants like to believe that there are lots of lurkers hanging on every word, and deciding how to live their lives on the basis of what they read, but I think that’s actually much more the exception than the rule.
March 22nd, 2007 at 7:36 pm
Hi guys,
Hey this has been a blast but I think you all are right, you would have to one masochistic SOB to come to this thread fresh and read the whole thing. Poor Jbc has been putting some good posts out there about the US attorney firings and we have been ignoring them. You will be happy to know I am not all that passionate about this subject and if you don’t mind having an old country boy join you, I promise to try (I sound like a politician now) and not be so damn long winded. I will also try and not steer the subject off course. I will however respond if you guys take a turn to the left. I did purposely steer this one because I felt a little robbed with my discussion with Ymatt on the Dick Cheney’s honor. I can at least let you know what is being said on conservative talk radio since I’m sure you hate listening to Rush as much as I hate listening to Air America.
A few parting shots.
Knarley, in one of your last posts, you said this discussion wasn’t about your country. Your country has always been a good friend and a trusted ally, sure we have our disagreements, but we are proud to have you as neighbors. What happens in Amerika affects Canada.
Thanks again for having me, if I get to be too much trouble ask and I will leave, I don’t want to be where I’m not wanted.
Let’s keep TV and the John Edwards family in our thoughts and prayers.
Short Haired Country Boy
March 22nd, 2007 at 11:05 pm
jbc – thanks again; nice to have a voice of reason.
shcb – You are right that jbc has made some fine posts recently. And it wasn’t a parting shot to say that what affects the US affects Canada, I agree that is a fact.
The motivation of all my posts is for a less violent world for my children and to offer friendly advice to a few Americans here who do not seem to recognize how far they and their country have strayed from the golden path set by their founding fathers. That was foolish of me because one can`t make another hear if they are not ready to listen (jbc is right about that.)
As a rule the result of violence is more violence, despite shcb high school story about the jocks setting the bully straight. Overt or threatened violence usually begets violence, whether as an immediate reprisal or a latent simmering resentment or hatred that rears up years later in more bloodshed.
Ghandi was successful for a reason, and showed the world a better way (not that he was a saint or that India didn`t have massive problems after the British.) Too bad so few have followed.
What I learned here at LIES is that there is a long path for me ahead to embody the teachings of Lao Tse or Sun Tzu. That alone made it all worthwhile.
TV, I applaud your coolness in the discussion and wish you the best.
Countryboy, try not to get into anymore trouble eh.
March 22nd, 2007 at 11:21 pm
shcb – two books you might enjoy if you haven’t read them already are “Freakanomics” and “Blink”
March 23rd, 2007 at 4:34 am
I will look into those books Knarley, take care of the family.
March 23rd, 2007 at 5:41 am
Have a good one guys, ’till we meet on the next thread!
March 23rd, 2007 at 9:39 am
I think a humorous response to shbc’s ‘madam’ story is in order.
I will try to stay within the confines of his analogy tho there may be asides for additional snarkage.
Once upon a time (for all good fairy tales start in this manner), there was a sleazy brutal Madam who happened to sit on a prime piece of real estate with significant quantities of black gold beneath her property. This Madam (Iraq) was in a blood feud with the crazy religious nutjob Madam (Iran) across the street and this feud had left millions dead. The cop (the US) had played both sides to get what he wanted. The cop and his pals gave intell, money and arms, both conventional and WMD to the crazy Iraqi Madam, while also selling the crazy Iranian Madam arms to retrieve some Johns who had been held hostage when the crazy Madam deposed the previous owner, a slightly less crazy, but equally brutal Madam (the Shah) installed by the cop and his ninja friend (the CIA).
Well one day (long after the two battered Madams made a uneasy truce) the Iraqi Madam decides she is going to forcibly annex the smaller whore house to the south (Kuwait) and does so. This whore house also sits on a huge deposit of oil and is run by a disreputable Madam as well (ok, not as brutal as the other two madams, but damn close). Another enormous whore house to the south (Saudi Arabia) fears that their property is next and calls the cop (who has visited the Saudi Madam many times for, um, er, tea?) and pleads for help. Seeing as how the cop depends upon the Madams to fuel the gloabl economy with cheap whoopie (oil), the cop leaps to the defense of the Saudi Madam. The cop uses his hoarded wealth of influence and global power to cobble together a broad coalition of neighbors that promptly throws the Iraqi Madam out of the Kuwaiti Madam’s house and gives her a sound beating (unfortunately leaving her most hardened criminal hookers alive – the Rethuglican Guard). The Madam is nearly toppled by her own people/hookers, but the cop does nothing to intervene while the Iraqi Madam brutally suppresses this rebellion. The cop rationalizes that if the Iraqi Madam falls, then the Iranian Madam will emerge triumphant.
The world community imposes severe sanctions, imposes inspections, and destroys the vast majority of the Madam’s secret arsenal of hairspray, emery boards and other WMDs, none of which every took a single cop’s life or even threatened their friends friends (shout out to the totally innocent and completely blameless Israelis). The crazy Iraqi Madam pretended to have lots of this stuff to aggravate her watchers and actively planned on making more of these things when she got a chance. Note that the cop has about 6000 vans stuffed with WMDs but hasn’t used them since he subdued the crazy imperialist Geishas 50 years before the time of our story. The world imposes a no hooker zone in the north and south and the Iraqis there go about trying to get on with their lives. The Madam can still drive through their towns, but is reduced to a shadow of her former viciousness (but still plenty crazy).
Fast forward 10 years or so. The Iraqi Madam is much the worse for the intervening time. While she lends token financial support for crazy terrorist Madams in Palestine, her ability to threaten others is a neighborhood joke. Her adoption of Islam while continuing to a be a toothless Madam is also a laughable sop to other crazy hookers/Madams. Unfortunately an even crazier set of a splinter group (that the cops actually helped out in the 80s fighting a corrupt and domineering rent-a-cop who we’ll call the Soviets) launches a suicide hooker attack on the cop’s biggest city and their military industrial complex HQ. The attack is an amazing, unprecedented, highly suspicious success. All the normal defenses somehow did not work and the hookers manage to kill 3000 cops. Note that 30,000 cops die in their cars every year – cars fueled by the Madam’s #1 export product.
This makes the cop very very angry. And the rest of the world very very sad and angry as well. The cop gathers his best SWAT team and proceeds to remove the crazy Madam who harbored the crazy splinter group and soundly defeats them. Unfortunately the cop seems to think the better of putting an end to the craziest of these Madams career, and lets Osama slink off to the border between the Afghan Madam’s dilapidated hut and the crowded house of ill repute next door (Pakistan and the surprisingly reasonable Madam who seized power there a few years back). The cop makes a truce with the Pakistani Madam and then promptly forgets about the whole thing. Even tho these are the creeps who killed 3000 cops and the top cop (w) vowed to hunt down and kill.
Instead the top cop pulls out of Afghanistan and decides it is time to seize the opportunity (new pearl harbor anyone?) and settle scores with the Iraqi Madam (incidentally seizing her property and considerable oil wealth). The cop goes back over his files and trumps up all the hearsay, fabrications and downright lies he has ever heard (many of them easily googled as outright fibs) and justifies ignoring the health inspectors who claim with pretty unimpeachable certainty that the Madam is a toothless old bag after we have had our way with her for over a decade. Ignoring the pleas of the neighbors (google the coalition from GW1 vs GW2, w’s coalition of the willing [and easily bribed] is a sad joke), the cop gathers some friends and a few thugs and breaks into the Madam’s house and smashes it to pieces. The Iraqi Madam is eventually lynched on a Shiite holy day by a bunch of vigilante hookers. No WMDs are ever found.
The justification for the break in changes with the wind, but finally settles on a liberation and democratization of the Madam’s hookers (who are split into three camps, the Kurds, who loves servicing the cop and his friends, the Sunnis, who hate the cop and want him out of their house of ill repute, and the Shiites, who hate the cop almost as much as the Iranian Madam next door [who cleverly plays all these groups off one another]). Meanwhile the Osama Madam survives, plans additional criminal acts but hasn’t been able to do much more than become a rallying point for additional crazies stirred up by the cop’s heavy handed smashing of everything in his path toward global hegemony (and ‘peace’).
Fast forward four or five years. More than 3000 of the cop’s loyal soldiers have been killed in Iraq, with tens of thousands wounded. The cop is revealed to be a mendacious twit, clearly a sock puppet for the powerful oil and gas industry (not to mention the billions in graft to ‘defense’ contractors – or the billions in lost/misplaced Iraq reconstruction/war fighting moneys). The cop refuses to face reality and despite the downward plunge in the cop and his nation’s fortunes, stubbornly sticks to his guns (guns and more guns). No WMDs are ever found. Afghanistan is increasingly lawless and the former Madam and her cohorts are back on the scene (because they never really left). Globally, terrorism is up nearly 7X, but the cop refuses to look reality in the eye and say “ooops”
No WMDs are ever found. Heck of a job, bushie!
gosh this was fun!
thanks for the amusing analogy shcb
and I will add my prayers that TV’s operation goes well (just as I did the last time)
March 23rd, 2007 at 9:49 am
ps – I second the rec for “Freakonomics”
and would like to add “Team of Rivals” a great bio of Abe Lincoln
I’ll look into “Blink” as well (I just finished “tipping point”, which was not nearly as good as Freakonomics)
March 23rd, 2007 at 12:13 pm
Freakonomics and Tipping Point were great, both are more substantive then Blink, but Blink is still worthwhile for similar mind expanding reasons, in my humble opinion.
The New Pearl Harbor, a devastating book with detailed footnotes which systematically presents a powerful account questioning the official story of 9/11.
Following the publication of the government’s 9/11 Commission Report, Prof. Griffin published a second compelling book, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, which convincingly deconstructs the official story presented in the report. He shows, among many other things, that the executive director of the Commission was strongly biased in support of the secrecy desired by the White House. Prof. Griffins’ two books have sold over 100,000 copies both in the US and abroad. They have been translated into several languages, and have convinced many key people of the need for a truly independent investigation into that fateful day.
This is also a good place to start learning about the 911 issue (less entertaining but higher quality info than Loose Change):
http://www.wanttoknow.info/911information#911summaries
May peace be with you.
March 23rd, 2007 at 12:24 pm
enkidu, thanks for the fairy tale, it holds much truth. and was funny to boot!
March 23rd, 2007 at 1:05 pm
Slow down guys, the purpose of an analogy is take a small portion of complex issue and reduce it to simple enough terms to get your arms around that small part without the noise of the bigger picture. Your fairytail just restated your entire argument with a “once upon a time” at the beginning, after awhile you even stopped using the fictitious characters. I was just referring to the narrow question of whether it is possible to be justified in a decision even if history proves you wrong. It was fun though, wasn’t it. Now you have to realize you are dealing with a master BSer, I mean story teller. So don’t feel bad your attempt was less than stellar, just keep watching the masterdebater.
A few years back a Republican running for governor in Colorado refused to debate the Democrat because he said the Democrat was a ‘masterdebater’, I voted Democrat that year.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:22 am
shcb,
I would agree that sometimes you can be vindicated for taking an action even when the original reasons for your actions are wrong. But if the original reasons are based on forgeries and fraud, you are still guilty of forgery and fraud.
In your analogy, what did the “knockoff Rolex watches” refer to? In other words, what crimes of Saddam were discovered in place of the WMD after the invasion?
You also allude to security council members taking bribes. I presume you are referring to the UN Oil bribes scandal? I followed it close enough to realize that by all appearances it was a Republican (Rovian? Boltonian?) smear campaign to discredit the UN, and the one part that I did follow closely (the slanderous and politically motivated attacks on George Galloway) has resulted in the complete vindication of Galloway. It’s only purpose was to discredit the UN, slander Galloway and disrupt his effectiveness in championing the rights of the downtrodden for quite a while. Don’t want to debate that, just wanted to voice my objection to the US attacks on the UN being brought into the fray.
You stated, “I don’t know why Sadam didn’t let the inspectors do their jobs,” We probably wouldn’t agree on which of many explanations are most plausible but we should at least understand the range of possibilities. I will be bold and declare that the main reason (after ten years of sanctions and being bullied by the Americans and much of the world and perhaps even a feeling of betrayal about what he perceived as a US okay for him to invade Kuwait) for messing with the UN inspectors was mostly an issue of pride.
Also, isn’t it a stretch to compare prostitution with the manufacture of WMD’s? To make prostitution in your analogy house you assume ample supplies of supple young women; but, to make WMD you need the materials to develop the WMD which the UN sanctions prevented from being supplied. The analogy falls flat there. It would fit better if you had said that the Madam was suspected of operating a house of ill repute using critical ill old ladies from a leper colony. And that my friend is pathetic.
Analogy or not, what’s wrong with this picture? Everything. We are discussing the merits of monstrous weapons to dispose of a single man, or a single regime, without even considering the colossal and horrendous impact on the lives of millions of people that result from such actions (internal British Giovernment documents have recently been leaked that support the Lancet’s (?) estimate of 655,000 Iraqi deaths up to 2006 resulting from the 2003 invasion, 605,000 or so from violent causes).
Thinking that all out war is justified to depose a regime belongs in the distant past history of humankind, not in what are supposed to be more enlightened times.
April 2nd, 2007 at 8:09 am
…back to the fairy tale for a second. Was the aside about automobile fatalities supposed to offset the number of “cops” killed on 9-11? That’s a surprisingly thick-headed comparison, even for you.
April 2nd, 2007 at 7:52 pm
Knarley,
I really wasn’t getting that deep with my analogy, I just grabbed prostitution off the top of my head, any crime probably would have worked. The reason I used another crime (Rolex watches) is because he was brutally abusing the people of Iraq, plenty of reason for Clinton to invade Serbia. So he wasn’t crimeless, it wasn’t like we were invading Kuwait.
There was quite a lot of evidence of UN bribery scandal, the Bush administration chose not to make too big of a deal of it so as to not drive a further wedge between us. This was probably a good choice, not one I would have made, but that is probably why I’m not in public office. Sadam had, as I’ve stated, enough yellow cake to make between 1 and 6 bombs the size of the nukes we dropped on Japan at the end of the war.
Lastly, I think the 600,000 figure is totally ridiculous, the government is somewhat tight lipped about the enemy body count, not wanting to be compared to Viet Nam. From reports of battles in Iraq I have heard, it seems we have are killing the enemy at about a 10 to 1 ratio, this would be on a historical par with the Pacific theater in WWII and the Vietnam war. This would mean we have killed around 35,000 enemy, and I would think it would be reasonable to think we may have killed as many as 3000 civilians as collateral damage. How many civilians the enemy has targeted or killed as collateral damage, I don’t know. But I don’t think it is any where near 600k. I’ve heard similar figures from more reputable and sane sources.
April 3rd, 2007 at 4:15 am
Quick question Knarley, if this administration deceived the American people to go to war in Iraq like you say they did, what was the motive?
April 6th, 2007 at 5:11 pm
oil
April 6th, 2007 at 7:17 pm
Ha Ha, Great Answer! one word, can you teach Knarley that trick? I’ll respond next week. you and yours have a great Easter.