Definitely the Contra series

^ Ah, found it. It's the final boss for Contra III.

I could be mistaken but I'm fairly certain it's not Contra.

^ I think it's Contra, but I'm not sure. I know I've played whatever it is.

IMO that's not better than the current green and black night vision. It doesn't have the contras which is really more important than super-grainy colour.

And this was really the way you think a government would do it? First rig up buildings with explosives in secret without anyone knowing, then somehow get people to agree to be suicide pilots of planes, then have those planes be passenger planes so that they are not just killing the people in the buildings but those in the planes, and then have them be piloted into the buildings, and then demolish the buildings with explosives.


Really?


You really think they would do this? I know the governments do some seriously horrible shit, and that the attack on Irag was not driven by trying to get anyone remotely connected to 9/11... but you really think that the US government would create something this convoluted when there are plenty of simpler ways to create a reason to attack another country and make your populous afraid of an unseen bogeyman.

The problem with conspiracy theorists is that even blatant facts that kill their suppositions are treated as merely 'bogus information from the man' and discounted, whereas utter drivel masquerading as science that agrees with them is lovingly circulated ad nauseum.


>> ^NobleOne:
^ Spoco2: why is it so unbelievable really? Has there never been government conspiracies or secrets? In your context of your argument the Government never killed Kennedy even after coming up with the idea of backing money to silver, pulling out of Vietnam, or dis-banding the CIA... Though i am sure it was one shooter with one bullet that went all nimbly bimbly bouncing around the car and pushing Kennedy back and to the left. That was how long ago and we still don't know all the facts on it.... I am sure as shit not that naive to think it was one guy from a 3rd floor book depository with a bolt action rifle... or the coincidences that Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, and Robert Kennedy were all killed within the same time frame... Or how about over throwing the Shah in Iran or the contras in Nicaragua.... Man the list is overwhelming.... Trillions of dollars in Oil will make people do i am sure just about anything....

^ Spoco2: why is it so unbelievable really? Has there never been government conspiracies or secrets? In your context of your argument the Government never killed Kennedy even after coming up with the idea of backing money to silver, pulling out of Vietnam, or dis-banding the CIA... Though i am sure it was one shooter with one bullet that went all nimbly bimbly bouncing around the car and pushing Kennedy back and to the left. That was how long ago and we still don't know all the facts on it.... I am sure as shit not that naive to think it was one guy from a 3rd floor book depository with a bolt action rifle... or the coincidences that Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, and Robert Kennedy were all killed within the same time frame... Or how about over throwing the Shah in Iran or the contras in Nicaragua.... Man the list is overwhelming.... Trillions of dollars in Oil will make people do i am sure just about anything....

Star Wars Defense Initiative
Invading Grenada and Nicaragua, etc
Iran Contra

National defense. That's the only thing that federal government actually SHOULD be doing, so I don't have a problem with them so much. I'd prefer less political meddling in international matters though. Small government, strict constitution, fiscal responsibility. Nowadays the obstacle to these issues is domestic entitlement spending, social engineering, and so forth. Reagan could have done better, but with a democrat congress it is hard. He talked the right stuff though. Even the Repubican party didn't like how hard he was pushing for cuts in domestic spending.

Star Wars Defense Initiative
Invading Grenada and Nicaragua, etc
Iran Contra

I was in grade school then, but I remember Reagan pushing some pretty expensive stuff, and committing some fringe actions that I would now say push the constitutional envelope. It wasn't just congress.

>> ^bcglorf:


But the whole truther movement is based around planted explosives in the buildings, is it not? All the videos and information I've gone through hold that in common.
The thing is if the terrorists were able to plant demolition charges in the building, why bother with the airplanes?
If the government was behind it, and they planted the explosives, the question is still why they should bother with the airplanes? It's still easily blamed on the terrorists, it wouldn't even be the first time that terrorists had used explosives against the towers.
The Truther movement's questions do not warrant investigation or follow-up, and I see open ridicule as good a tool as any to keep the gullible from being drawn into their BS. Even if the government WAS behind the attacks, the Truther movement would actually be even worse BS, by dragging a whole class of people questioning the official story off on some goose chase after imaginary demolition charges.


That is one of the main things they claim, yes - I'm not a truther myself, though..

They don't believe that explosives would have been planted by terrorists - or at least not terrorists operating outside of the control of "those in power."

I think they'd argue that both explosives and planes were used for maximum effect (toppling both towers) and because planes provide that strong, visual, undeniable evidence. Obviously there's a need for an outside attacker - those "terrorists" flying the planes. There's also a lot of muddy, suspicious circumstances surrounding the terrorists themselves, and their ties to the mainly fictional 'Al-Qaeda.'

These ideas relies on the belief that there are people in power in Washington, with far too much power, pulling the strings to suit their own agendas. What lends credence to these theories is moreso what happened after the attacks - how the US went to war, looking for Osama in a cave, never finding him, the whole oil thing... certainly suspicious. Then you look at the Gulf of Tonkin incident, realize it's not unheard of to lie to go to war, etc. etc. And when you do some digging you'll find that the evidence for this secret government is quite strong, though widely ignored and often scoffed at. The Iran-Contra scandal was a sort of shocking insight into what goes on behind the scenes, along with many other events like that which most Americans have no clue ever happened.

I dunno though, I'm arguing from their perspective because I do believe there needs to be more investigation. The official report was certainly not an adequate review of the events that took place.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Bill, Moyers, shadow, government, govt, Iran, Contra, Scandal, Rex, 84, FEMA, Camps' to 'Bill Moyers, shadow government, govt, Iran, Contra, Scandal, Rex, 84, FEMA, Camps' - edited by EndAll

In reply to this comment by mxxcon:
i wasn't commenting so much on atrocities they've done but the fact that the whole organization from the very bottom to the very top is structured to encourage and cover up these crimes.
and the fact that US Gov't still support this organization
and the fact that there is no measurable public outcry against blackwater or gov't officials that are not acting stop this.

this country needs some of that sense of responsibility and shame that is so common in japan's society.
90% of our elected officials should commit public seppuku.

The whole organization from the very bottom to the top is structured to encourage and cover up these crimes? You mean like how the American government itself tries to cover up things like the My Lai massacre in Vietnam, or it's use of biological weapons in Korea (those brave few who protested were condemned were and persecuted: McCarthyism at its finest during the height of the cold war), or tried to cover up the whole Iran-Contra affair (Where the US sold Iran weapons and gave the funds to the Contra guerrillas in Nicaragua, who used American funded weapons to commit countless atrocities) or the army's use of torture in the current Iraqi war?

And sense of shame and responsibility that is common in Japan's society? You mean like how the doctors of Unit 731 who performed live vivisection on prisoners and civilians with no anesthesia, who viewed non-japanese civilians as nothing better than "logs" to test on, and how these doctors were not charged with war crimes and went back into Japanese society and lead successful careers afterward? And how so many Japanese people, including influential politicians are vocal deniers of war crimes committed by the Japanese army (that whole section was censored out of Japanese school curriculum)? Or like how Issei Sagawa, who murdered and ate Renee Hartevelt, a Dutch exchange student in Paris, is a celebrity and a free man in Japan, and makes a living from his infamy? Shame and denial are not mutually exclusive.

I'm saying this kind of corruption and coverup, and this kind of public apathy, is hardly unique to America, and is hardly a new phenomenon. It's ubiquitous. Seriously, Blackwater is one of the least things to be ashamed about in our history.

standup bass guitar? = up right bass/ double bass/ contra bass/ acoustic bass.
Not a bass guitar at all really

Interesting. And I DID look at Ledpups links. I am aware of the iran-contra debacle, but need some sprucing up on my info. So thanks to both of you.

You are correct that it is not a big leap to assume that those chems were used as weapons. America has made some pretty egregious errors in the past with regards to foreign policy. But isn't there a way in which the figures like Ahmed. are living in the past? Especially with the new rhetoric coming out of the Obama white house? And its funny that Iran is STILL making this about us while the white house is being careful and distant, and not about themselves and the iranians who are dying in the streets!

>> ^ledpup:
If you like, read this article from the CBC: http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/kurds/alliance.html
It is untrue that the US provided the IRAQI regime with weapons (chemical or otherwise). They did provide them, as Zakaria said, with agricultural credits, as well as with "dual-use" items which were not inherently military items, but would be vital to any war-time situation. That said, even if it were true that the US provided Iraq with weapons during the iran-iraq war, it doesn't negate the fact that this regime under ahmedinejad is a brutal and repressive one, and is trying to cover up this fact as much as they can.

Ba baw! United States support for Iraq during the Iran–Iraq war. But hey, nice try. Oh, also interesting, the Iran-Contra Affair.


Are you really trying to put this to bed with a WIKIPEDIA article? Yeesh.

I mean, I am no apologist for US foreign policy, and Zakaria has indeed been accused of being one in the past, so I am not surprised this is a 'thing.' Still, all the items listed in the above article would be categorized as dual-use. And I mean, yeah, its pretty ugly what we did, even if we didn't directly provide them with weapons. But I think the original point was how idiotic is was for this guy to pull that shit out when we're talking about the current wrongs of the iranian regime.