>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^ponceleon:
Actually I have no problem with motive. I heard Ron Paul say at the debates that we are spending 20bil to air-condition tents for soldiers in Afghanistan... that 20bil is making SOMEONE really rich, so there is definitely a LOT of profit to be made in war.
I guess I should've been more clear. I agree that there's a full array of means, motive, and opportunity for Bushclan/Templars/Majestic 12, etc. to conspire to make the whole 9/11 attack happen in the first place.
What I don't understand is the way that suspicion has transformed into a decade-long attempt to prove that demolitions brought down the various WTC building. I simply can't fathom why anyone would do that, especially if you were a super-capable secret cabal concocting the entire scenario to manipulate people.
If it was an evil organization who could secretly wire the building with explosives, then why wouldn't they just pop the explosives and blame Al Qaeda for it? Why would they hire/manipulate Al Qaeda into flying airplanes into the building, and then demo the building Hollywood style? It seems like it'd be a huge risk (what if someone found the explosives early or evidence of them after?) for no apparent reward.
The buildings fell because of the planes that got flown into them. The real questions to be asking if you're looking for a conspiracy would be "did anyone seem to know about it in advance who shouldn't have?" or more damningly, "did anyone seem to disregard advance information about it who shouldn't have?"
You know, like someone who ignored intelligence briefings with titles like "bin Laden determined to strike in the US"...


Netrunner, what's your thoughts on Operation Northwoods?

Northwoods was a false-flag operation plan by the CIA in 1962. It called for terrorist attacks like hijacking planes, disguising US fighter jets as Cuban MIG fighters, and killing US citizens.

Journalist James Bamford summarized Operation Northwoods in his April 24, 2001 book Body of Secrets:
"Operation Northwoods, which had the written approval of the Chairman and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for innocent people to be shot on American streets; for boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas; for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. People would be framed for bombings they did not commit; planes would be hijacked. Using phony evidence, all of it would be blamed on Castro, thus giving Lemnitzer and his cabal the excuse, as well as the public and international backing, they needed to launch their war."


The plan was on the desk of JFK and he refused. JFK was later assassinated. The following year LBJ used the staged Gulf of Tonkin incident to go to war in Vietnam. The people that questioned that incident were called conspiracy nuts. But the truth eventually came out, and it will for 9/11 also.

The point is false-flag attacks and government manipulation of evidence is nothing new. And is certainly nothing our government hasn't done before.

well the wings on a plane do visually go up when the plane flies unless its a fighter jet.

As for asking questions why would you discourage people asking questions and wanting answers presumably most questions that are not totally absurd can be given reasonable answers.

911 and conspiracies in general are a good way to practice exorcising critical thought intemrs of evaluating what asurtions are valid or crazy (regardless of the ultimate truth) and identifying logical falicies and thinking about the world around you , its also far more entertaining than watching your average Hollywood film .

ether way You don't even need a conspiracy to see that the government is and was massively incompetent , and the forcing us all to go to war on lies should be enough in itself to get people in government jaild for life.



Its also interesting how governments use events like 911 as excuses to pass laws that ultimately cripple a society and are entirely counter productive for the population but beneficial to a small minority ( patriot act) < also interesting that they name the laws and acts something that makes it hard to argue against them without sounding Un amercan>

"Guy sits near a fighter jet's low level, bombing run... Girl runs away"

Wrong, wrong and wrong.

Firstly, calling Harper a warmonger when it was the Liberal government who first sent Canadian troops to Afghanistan is ignorant. Further, the only firm pull-out date set by the Canadian government is December 2011. Harper, with the support of the Liberal party in a parliamentary vote, did extend the mission beyond 2009, but Feb 2009 was never a firm pull-out date but merely a date set to review the situation.

Second, while the Conservative government has made deals to purchase the F-35 (which is the only real replacement for our ancient CF-18s) your pricing is so insanely out of line and the "without engines" myth is pure moronic propaganda. As was shown in today's Ottawa Citizen:
"Lockheed Martin makes planes, not engines. The engine for the F-35 will be supplied by Pratt & Whitney. The government will purchase the engines from Pratt & Whitney, just as will every F-35 customer, because that company will provide the guarantee and ongoing support for the engine. Thus for purposes of the contract with Lockheed Martin, the engines are "government furnished equipment." However, the cost for the engines is built into the $9-billion overall acquisition budget."


As for $300 million each, where could you possibly get such skewed numbers?

"The Canadian acquisition price of $75 million is for the aircraft only (and yes, it does include an engine). American cost figures tend to include other program elements like spare parts, weapons and infrastructure. This is obvious; 65 aircraft at $75 million each costs $4.9 billion total -much less than the acquisition budget. If you use the overall $9-billion acquisition budget, each Canadian F-35 would appear to cost $138 million because it incorporates all those other costs."


In your haste to spread lies you not only doubled the cost of the aircraft, but you took away the engines that were included in the original budgeting.

Having a strong opposition is an important part of democracy, being ignorant is not.>> ^notarobot:

Warmonger Stephen Harper, kept the Canadian military engaged in Afghanistan past pull-out dates, made deals to purchase F 35 fighter jets at $300M each above cost and without any engines...
So it isn't surprising that Yoko Ono had the video of Stephen Harper butchering her husband's music pulled.

Warmonger Stephen Harper, kept the Canadian military engaged in Afghanistan past pull-out dates, made deals to purchase F 35 fighter jets at $300M each above cost and without any engines...

So it isn't surprising that Yoko Ono had the video of Stephen Harper butchering her husband's music pulled.

This brings up an interesting point. Has the coalition said if they will shoot down rebel fighter jets violating the no-fly zone?

Of course I'm not suggesting that's what happened in this case. But just that there's no avoiding the issue, since it seems the rebels aren't keen on accepting the no-fly zone.

best part is the fighter jet.

This reminds me of my brother, an Air Force pilot who had to train on little fighter jets before he could get to the cargo plane he wanted to fly.

Every time you upchuck into the white bag, you have to take into the commander's office and put it on their desk. Do it three times, you're out.

My brother had trouble not upchucking. His solution -- upchuck and SWALLOW IT. No barf bag problem.

I know that there are men who go to war and do heroic things. I think this ranks right up there as a heroic act.

[redacted]

Let me put words in your mouth, @NetRunner. Your solution is since we need police we must raise taxes so they have anything at their disposal including tanks, fighter jets, nuclear missiles, et cetera.

Should work out awesome.

so how does the wall stack up against a 757 that`l be more obvious than a fighter jet..

I love how it begins with 'athiest evolution' and 'Darwin's undeniable connection to Hitler' and ends with 'Now.. send us some money.'


Anyone else suspect they passed these books, that look like the 'real' book, without a word about the additions and modifications?

Like a Jahova's Witness' passing out magazines with fighter jets on the cover and absolutely no clue that it's Christian's pushing their God drug.



Frankly I think a lot of even the obama hysteria is that people know Christianity is slowly dying out as the overwhelmingly majority religion in this country, and I for one couldn't be more happy. USA as a secular nation outside the cities? One could only wish.

Damn, that B-52 fighter jet sure was flying low!

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Make sure you scramble the fighter jets out of Texas and roll the tanks and other equipment into New Mexico, before they secede - and then - don't let the door hit you where the good lord split you Tejas. Thanks for all the TexMex and Austin City Limits.

God forbid that a nation should try and provide health care for its people - by all means - GTFO of the country, if that offends.