9/11 Disinformation

[Digital Guerrilla]

When you search the internet you find so much information about 9/11. Most of the information is really disinformation it is either the planes were missiles that were disguised by a giant hologram projector. These types of "explanation" about 9/11 are usually "conspiracy theorist" and sometimes you have to laugh at these guys because well they are a bunch of nut jobs. Why is there always this focus on nonsense like the "no plane theory", "missile hoax"-involving the Pentagon, when some real questions still remain unanswered? Why did the "New Warren Commission" not investigate the "war games" being played by NORAD and NRO on 9/11? If the "black boxes" from all four flights have been recovered how come that information has yet to be made public? Who had the power to turn off Air Force protection of New York and Washington?

9/11 was an inside job involving high level government officials in the United States government.

[SandChigger]

Unless at some point during the last few hours I've slipped unawares through a wormhole and ended up in an alternate reality (without being shredded down to fundamental particles in the process), the Warren Commission was charged with investigating the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. I believe you mean The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. You could call it the Kean Commission, I suppose, but most people prefer "the 9/11 Commission".

Now, you were saying about nut jobs? :)

[Andrew]

We already had some 9/11 conspiracy threads. Looks them up for some more info :)

[Andrew]

Here is more proof that 9/11 after effects was inside job.

So if the anthrax mailer was a government scientist, when will ABC acknowledge that their "four independent, well placed sources" claiming it came from Iraq were wrong?

Basically the anthrax attacks came from a USA scientist from anthrax on a US military base. But tests conducted on the anthrax (at the very same base) showed it came from Iraq acording to ABC news. But in reality none of the evidence was there.

All the info against Iraq was completely falsified so that an invasion could occur.

And of course the one guy responsible just so happens to kill himself...

[SandChigger]

Are you saying you believe 9/11 was an "inside job"?

[Andrew]

No, I guess I mistyped it.

I think that invading Iraq was an inside job. 9/11 gave the US gov all the power they needed to do whatever they wanted. Any proof about Saddam and WMD and attacking the US were false. There was no threat from Iraq.

[Tatar Khan]

The threat from Iraq was due to Saddam Husein dreams of single Arabic state, with him preferably as the leader of the state. As you might see this would be great for Arabs as it will put a strong power on the map and bad for the West. A single Arabic State can command the whole oil supply of the region. This means that it can cut oil off and thus cause another Oil crisis of 1970s. Now everything was fine if Saddam did not kick out the UN atomic inspectors. This created the suspicion of the WMD program. US doesn't have the best intelligence system in the world, it always was weak in terms of having people on the ground. And so it did not take that long to create the whole idea that there were WMDs. Defecting Iraqis screamed that there were such programs (hoping that US will remove Saddam and put them in charge) and having no better intelligence (from orbit anything can look like WMD) it was concluded that there are WMDs. Plus hey, Saddam won't let inspectors in, he must be hiding something, right? Well no, Saddam was playing his own game.

Why Saddam should not have WMD because it will disbalance the region and will make Iraq a regional power. Regional power would be able to press it wishes on the surrounding countries, thus giving it a good command of the region and its main resource oil. Once again there would be a person who can with one move of his hand cut oil supply and cause oil crisis of 1970s. In addition it is possible that countries in Middle East not wanting to be at the whim of Iraq would decide to arm themselves up with WMD. Now we have an arms race and higher possibility that finally someone will decide to use WMD (Hey, India and Paksitan almost did in 1990s).

So now it seems that removal of Saddam Husein is needed. Ok but the two above paragraphs are not going to exactly motivate the nation or the soldiers to go and fight. But words like Freedom, Justice, Liberty would. Hey why not throw in the fact that he attacked us first as well, so we can say that he was partially responsible for 9/11. Now are people are willing to go and fight and die for their country. Hey that anthrax could have been from Iraq, it could have been from the stuff that was taken during the first Gulf War and now stored in US government lab.

US through the last century has been good at following its own laws, it seems to wants to have the clean image that at any time the government can say we never broke the law. Engineering 9/11 would just destroy the whole tradition. Imagine that if Obama gets into the office and able to prove that 9/11 was inside job, democrats would have monopoly on power for next 20 years minimum. You can just than dismantle the whole republican party after that, sue them all. It would be giving the next guy a political jackpot.

Why Saddam was reluctant to let the inspectors in? I don't know, mu guess it was a political move. In the region that is not pro-American a country that can stand up to US would be a hero. Now imagine if that country leader fighting the guerrilla was was able to get US to leave the country in the loss, he would be the region's hero. He can really unify the region. Maybe that what Saddam wanted. Either way things did not go his way. Well things did not go US way either.

Iraq always balanced against Iran in the region. The two kept each other in check, but not anymore as Iraq is now weak. Iran should take advantage of this situation (and it is doing that), it would not be good for the West but the West has not enough resources to do anything about it, they are too busy with Iraq. My guess, due to US's lack of occupation experience, and due to crappy intelligence they thought they would be welcomed in Iraq with open arms (like French welcomed them  in WWII). Past occupation experience was with West Germany and Japan both which were interested in cooperating with US. Vietnam was there too but the problem with Vietnam was that Vietcong could always retreat to North Vietnam and no invasion of North Vietnam could be done without bring in China in the nix. So here now looking  at Iraq US saw a country that it could occupy and surpress dissident movement easily as it had no where to run, no other country would shelter them due to lack of protection. So US saw that it can remove Saddam put "democratic" government in and they will be back to having Iraq and Iran balancing each other. Did not work out, and now we are in the final mess.

[Andrew]

FBI was told to blame Anthrax scare on Al Qaeda by White House officials

More government lies.

[Digital Guerrilla]

Thanks Sand Chigger but actually I forgot to put the word "new" in that particular sentence, it was actually a typo.

[SandChigger]

Well, THAT makes all the difference now, doesn't it? ;)

[Digital Guerrilla]

Only you needed clarification and I find it strange that a person with a Chinese flag beside his screen name would even care to know so much about JFK or American 60's politics. It is then again the internet. I always find it strange of young men telling old men tales but never quite learning the lesson of the old man's tale.

[Tatar Khan]

Only you needed clarification and I find it strange that a person with a Chinese flag beside his screen name would even care to know so much about JFK or American 60's politics. It is then again the internet. I always find it strange of young men telling old men tales but never quite learning the lesson of the old man's tale.

It is a Japanese flag that he has next to his name.

[Digital Guerrilla]

Thanks  ;)

[SandChigger]

Why, aren't you the dear calling me "young"?!

But flattery will get you nowhere!

Let's see, where to begin?

Just because I'm in Japan (NOT China) doesn't mean I'm Japanese. Or Chinese. People do move around and live in different countries. I'm sure you've at least heard of the idea. (And where are you, pray tell? The flag confusion [geographical ignorance?] and bad writing in the OP make me think you must be a fellow American! Vote Bush in 2008!)

I really have no idea what you're on about at the end, but I'm sure you'll explain it somehow.

THIS WAS ONLY A TEST. WE NOW RETURN YOU TO YOUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED PROGRAMMING, "Wingnuts in Love!" ::)

[Digital Guerrilla]

I understand what it is your world is tiny and the air is stale.

[Digital Guerrilla]

Everything has become a conspiracy theory and even the conspiracy theory is explained with a conspiracy theory it is becoming so asinine. The youtube videos are so annoying EVERY single one has the same "Star Wars" like intro with music that seems it was lifted from and old "Twilight Zone" episodes (not the new series, the original series). Granted I do not believe everything the current US administration has said about anything (Iraq, 9/11 or the Patriot Act take your pick it is more than enough to choose). The fact remains there are lies about 9/11 but in order to find or even understand it you first have to wade through a sea of disinformation.

[SandChigger]

I understand what it is your world is tiny and the air is stale.

Now if only you could understand what they are we have punctuation and grammar for a reason.  ::)

Granted I do not believe everything the current US administration has said about anything (Iraq, 9/11 or the Patriot Act take your pick it is more than enough to choose).

Hmm.

Does that logically entail that you do, however, believe everything that they have said about something?

Or that you believe everything they have said about nothing. (Whatever saying everything about nothing would mean!)

Or that you believe nothing they have said about anything? Or something? Or everything?

It would help me immensely if you could be just a wee bit clearer about what exactly it is you are talking about. :)

The fact remains there are lies about 9/11 but in order to find or even understand it you first have to wade through a sea of disinformation.

Well, since you obviously already have your waders on (is it necessary to have them pulled up like that, all the way to your armpits?), DO get back to us the next time you dredge up another tasty morsel, what?  :D

[Digital Guerrilla]

It is the "eyes wide shut" syndrome. People are far too blind. Ignorance is bliss; the general public doesn't have a clue and will refuse to see the light.

[spazelord]

When you search the internet you find so much information about 9/11. Most of the information is really disinformation it is either the planes were missiles that were disguised by a giant hologram projector. These types of "explanation" about 9/11 are usually "conspiracy theorist" and sometimes you have to laugh at these guys because well they are a bunch of nut jobs. Why is there always this focus on nonsense like the "no plane theory", "missile hoax"-involving the Pentagon, when some real questions still remain unanswered? Why did the "New Warren Commission" not investigate the "war games" being played by NORAD and NRO on 9/11? If the "black boxes" from all four flights have been recovered how come that information has yet to be made public? Who had the power to turn off Air Force protection of New York and Washington?

9/11 was an inside job involving high level government officials in the United States government.

This statement is true further than any reasonable doubt only if we can expand our consciousness and allow our selves to seek the truth beyond the fabricated T.V, radio, newspaper etc... We will then see the actual truth with a bit of research of our own. When the highest point of government officials does not reveal any information on specific events about 911, it is at that point we must not look in to our enemy clamed in Arab world yet the enemy is to confront in our own soil. Patriotism towered war is made to narrow the mind and close it, that way it can be controlled and that

[SandChigger]

In the constitution of the US there is no mandatory law to enforce people to pay income tax, it is only voluntarily yet people are forced to pay income tax by the IRS. This is a crime and illegal act by the IRS.

WRONG. Guess again: there is an amendment to that effect.

SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT to THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES:

INCOME TAX

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

Or do you not accept amendments to the Constitution via the methods defined in that document for such purpose?

To "expand [y]our consciousness and allow [yourself] to seek the truth beyond" that promulgated on YouTube, you must first remove your head from its current nether locus of insertion.

(For anyone interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_protester_statutory_arguments

"The courts that have been presented with such arguments have ruled them to be spurious, unpersuasive, frivolous, or all three." ::) )

[spazelord]

WRONG. Guess again: there is an amendment to that effect.

Or do you not accept amendments to the Constitution via the methods defined in that document for such purpose?

To "expand [y]our consciousness and allow [yourself] to seek the truth beyond" that promulgated on YouTube, you must first remove your head from its current nether locus of insertion.

(For anyone interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_protester_statutory_arguments

"The courts that have been presented with such arguments have ruled them to be spurious, unpersuasive, frivolous, or all three." ::) )

Instead of insults, why don't you look in to the law and describe to us the law to pay income tax. There is no mandatory law to pay income tax only direct and indirect taxs and if you don't know what they mean you can take your head out of your rear and stick it somewhere useful. "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes" Yes that is absolutely true and they can do that at anytime but that does not define income tax law nor does that define the meaning of income. For starters you must find out what the definition of income is and how it was defined in the supreme court of the United States! Then when you do your home work you can identify the quote from above.

These are real cases from real lawyers and people and are not about youtube videos yet it is to educate people like you. So instead of arguing here you can go and find out what your real rights are, not in the main stream media powered/supported by the IRS.

Again find out the real definition of income before you conclude income tax. When you don

[SandChigger]

I know all I need to, luv.

I know: I don't pay, I go to jail.

I know: You don't want to pay, I don't want to pay.

I know: Neither matters one bit.

Please jump up and down some more.

[spazelord]

Well if you have figure things out in life step aside and allow others to learn and grow, insted of blockling the way. If you don't have something productive to say about this subject then look else where if it doesn't server you.

[SandChigger]

Would it not be remiss of me to <b>not</b> attempt to block people from wandering down a path I perceive as detrimental, one which leads nowhere or to increased ignorance rather than knowledge?

Or do you believe that everyone should test out everything for themselves, wasting a lot of time and effort on a lot of idiocy?

"Spurious, unpersuasive, frivolous, or all three." That's the verdict of the courts thus far. But you know more and better than the judges. Well enough!

(Server me? Roger me blue but that's a new usage on me. Computer joke perhaps?)

[spazelord]

Would it not be remiss of me to <b>not</b> attempt to block people from wandering down a path I perceive as detrimental, one which leads nowhere or to increased ignorance rather than knowledge?

Or do you believe that everyone should test out everything for themselves, wasting a lot of time and effort on a lot of idiocy?

"Spurious, unpersuasive, frivolous, or all three." That's the verdict of the courts thus far. But you know more and better than the judges. Well enough!

(Server me? Roger me blue but that's a new usage on me. Computer joke perhaps?)

1st off US CONSTITUTION isn