The government lied to us...and they should have

reply to post by jackinthebox


Which 9/11 theory should I believe? They can't all be correct. I guess that's better than believing the official theory though, as those people are naive.

reply to post by _Johnny_Utah_


Actually, if my mom slept around, yes, I would rather know that. I had questioned my past just to be sure, not just my parents, but relatives considering the times, free love and all.

If they cheated, yes, I would rather know the truth. Maybe you are too scared to not live in a 'perfect' world. Let me tell you, there is nothing perfect about life. Hiding from things prevents your own emotional and social growth.

The TRUTH is always right. If you are too sensitive to know the truth, I suppose you can shelter yourself. But don't decide to shelter me for me.

If I was adopted, it would be my right to know the truth. If I was a child born from a surrogate, it would be my right to know. If I was born from the use of fertility drugs, I should know. If I was born while my parents were doing other medications/drugs, I should know. If my father was an alcoholic, I should know. It doesn't protect me by hiding the truth. I can only learn, grow, and be cautious in my own life knowing my TRUE family history. It is also necessary for future medical treatments. To lie about it, hurts more than the false belief of 'protection'.


I hope you understand.



How about this ... our government needs to quit meddling with other countries, causing and fighting wars, placing leadership, and other things that they would feel they have the need to lie about. Don't you get it? If they are doing something they must lie about to protect themselves from criticism at home and abroad, then they shouldn't do those things!

Oh, but installing democracy is our duty! No, it isn't. How do we react when other forms of government conduct espionage, and try to place their form of government in other countries? Not too happy about it. That is called a double standard ... the U.S. is losing its credibility because of this factor.

The general U.S. public considered communism the evil government ... but that is because they listened to the boogey man lies. It is about the same as Capitalism, which is what our system has sadly morphed into (instead of a Democratic Republic). See, if you study the true meaning of communism, it isn't much different than what we are suppose to be ... the problem is, both that model and our own is subject to those being placed in the government structure to serve us starting to take control and create power from their positions. They end up controlling the public and feeding them lies, instead of serving them.

Take a good look at the world, without prejudice. Take a moment to ponder things in a scholarly manner of what they idealistically mean ... and relate them to what they really are. Don't use bias and bull# to form your opinions ... unfortunately, that is what blind patriotism does ... we have seen this in past societies, and we can see us, the U.S., starting to turn down that path.


You do realize we use to mind our own business, right? U.S.A. is meant to keep to their own, take care of their own, and not be the world police or oppress and lie to accomplish goals of 'officials' which is a twisted term used today for public servants. It gives them false power, and the ability to legally accept money from lobbyists makes things even worse.




There is a big difference between lies and not giving away your position on a battlefield during war.




As far as 9/11 ... well, it is actually an insult to the victims and their families to NOT question things if the official stories and reports don't make sense and obvious mistakes were made in the investigations.

It is an insult to the people of the U.S. to not question and pursue the truth and justice against such an atrocity.

There is no doubt who did it was/were terrorist(s). The question is WHO were the terrorists.

Check the odd coincidences. Bush, Cheney, and crew wanted a 'Pearl Harbor' event before they were in office to proceed with a plan.

The guy who bought the towers was losing money, and was going to have to spend millions to bring the buildings up to code. He made billions from terrorist insurance he took out just before the attacks, awarded separate claims for each building.

There was a large stock trade that sent up a flag just before the event that was conducted by Israelis. Funny that who we go after for the event is their enemies ...

WTC 7 still hasn't been explain by the official report. The center collapsed a split second before the rest fell into its footprint. Any damage was to the outside facing the towers, but the opposite side of the building which had no damage fell just as swift as the front of the building.

Everything was disposed of without proper evaluation, even though it was the 'worst attack ever on u.s. soil' ... why wasn't the investigation the most thorough, and the evidence the most scrutinized ... instead of being the most quickly disposed of evidence? Those who rushed the removal of evidence are guilty of a crime, as they would be for tampering with evidence of any murder ... so charge them with that crime x 3000.

There are other coincidences, but those are argued constantly. These are big red flags that need to be answered.

I know that if I bought fire insurance on a house, and my house burned down next month, they would investigate me. If I said I needed my partner to die so I could move ahead with a business venture, I would be investigated. Even tires blowing out on vehicles a few years ago had a huge investigation to find out how the tires were faulty, which is not equal to a building falling.


No, not saying it had to be done by our gov't, our citizens. I am not ruling out much either. Sometimes everything is not clear, and when lies and hiding things are involved ... it really muddies up water and clouds judgment and makes even innocent people appear guilty.


I think we owe it to the victims and their families to respectfully search for the ultimate truths of that day. It does them no justice and no respect to leave it as it is. It is not crazy conspiracy theorists who question ... it is the vicitms' families, and now other governments who lost their civilians as well, who are starting to question, want to investigate, and find the truth for themselves.

Throwing insults and dismissing anyone who questions the official stories of various events in history and present times ... especially those who admit their government lies ... is doing no service to their own Constitution, their own Country, and their People.

Consistently doing this, in the face of admitting their government is deceitful, and excusing it for various reasons ... begins to lead past an argument, and more towards intended misdirection and disinformation.

There is nothing wrong with fully believing whichever version you want, but to try and stop people from pursuing truth in the face of a known liar ... is quite a disservice to all.

Always question authority. Those in power will use it against you if they become even slightly corrupted.


Your basically permitting them to lie about 9/11. You say, it is better to not know if you mom was a tramp, believe what makes you sleep well at night. This could be an excuse to not tell the public the truth about a tragedy. It is a false excuse.


What about the known lies about Iraq? The ignoring of reports that showed contrary evidence to further an agenda?

Are not the people who perpetrated the lie that has killed TRUE U.S. heroes, the soldiers risking their lives, guilty of murder?

To knowingly put lives in danger to further an agenda that you had for years, then, not only your military lives are lost but innocent civilians in another country as well. That is pure evil and ... the LIES that cause it are never justified and those people should be tried and punished no matter how many laws they try to pass to protect themselves from their past atrocities.

reply to post by _Johnny_Utah_

the sad fact is that there are bad people out there who would love nothing more than to have nations like the UK and America destroyed. In order to preserve those things we hold dear, there has to be a film of darkness. If you had an enemy who wanted to kill you or ruin you, would you broadcast everything you did to him? would you make sure anyone who wanted to know anything about you knew? Would tell him you plan to stop him and you are going after him in this way with this certain route? No, that would be silly.

A "film of darkness" is one thing, but the land of darkness is something else entirely. When the basic ideals of what defines our society is undermined in the name of security, then the enemy has already won. I am not saying that specific details of particular on-going operations have to be revealed, but the secrecy level has gone far beyond that. I don't expect a soldier to tell me their exact position or what their next mission is, but I do expect that soldier to know exactly what he/she is fighting for.

Maybe some of the difference we have, i think, is in how we see people overall. Yes, there are some people who would do anything to stay in power, but to say or make it seem like most of them are like that is unfair. they are people just like you and I...some good, some bad.

This is true to a certain extent, but you fail to see that the like-minded people who would do anything to stay in power have done just that. There is no clearer example of that then two secret society members running against eachother to be President of the United States. One agreed to "throw" the election, so that the overall goals of their evil agenda could be carried out. Or are you going to argue that there are no groups operating in secret with the goal of subverting our government?

This is going to sound very ugly at first, but give me chance before you start casting spells on me or calling in alien attack ships.

Because a person knew or was related to a person who died in 9-11 has nothing whatsoever to do with the subject...nothing.

In response to those you said you lost, I am sorry...
I had three cousins who died on that day. One was a firefighter. So I understand in some way or another, what you went through.
At the time, I lived in Mississippi when they brought the USS Cole into port to get repairs done on it.


"It didn't happen again..." did it? i don't remember seeing anything on the news about that one. I must have not have watched the news or read any papers while passenger jets were being shot down.
Besides I thought the government blew up the towers....didn't they?
So let me get this straight...I guess the the terrorists we are fighting now said"hey, we hate you guys, but lets work together on this one!"

It can't go both ways

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by BlueRaja

 

How would you describe it then? There are many theories out there, with only one thing in common with each other- it had to have been an inside job.

I would describe it as an ongoing investigation. That's why there are so many theories left on the table. The one theory that has been discredited is the one given to us by the 9/11 Comission.

Is it discredited because there have been lies found, or because there's information that can't be answered? Furthermore, has the notion that terrorists indeed flew planes into the WTC been discredited beyond a reasonable doubt, or are there just certain questions that still remain?
Let me know when one conspiracy theory is proven though.

reply to post by _Johnny_Utah_

How many people believe in something has no baring whatsoever on the truth of it.

True indeed. So why are you so insistent upon defending what the bulk of sheeple have swallowed and continue to believe? Please tell us your motives.

I love it! I am out to spread disinformation! that's why i spent over an hour on the phone with the IRS talking about payments!

Originally posted by jackinthebox




This is true to a certain extent, but you fail to see that the like-minded people who would do anything to stay in power have done just that. There is no clearer example of that then two secret society members running against eachother to be President of the United States. One agreed to "throw" the election, so that the overall goals of their evil agenda could be carried out. Or are you going to argue that there are no groups operating in secret with the goal of subverting our government?

With all else being equal, with 2 "Secret Society" members running, why would it matter which one won the election, if they're just a puppet of a shadow government. How do you throw an election though? Call people up and tell them not to vote?

reply to post by _Johnny_Utah_

A cover-up, in the sense I am talking here, comes on the end of a problem. A conspiracy sets out to create or fuel the problem. In one, there is no intent when the event occurs...in the other, intent is the primary reason for the event. See, a HUGE distinction.

What would be the reason to "cover-up" the facts of the Flight 800 disaster, if there were not an ongoing conspiracy? Even if the Navy had accidentally shot the plane down, it would have been viewed as a terrible tragedy. I seriously doubt, especially after some good spin, that the public would have been proned to mutiny or to make the Captain walk the plank. Accidents happen. Sure, I would expect an investigation and that measures be taken to prevent this in the future, but mistakes do happen, and most people accept this. Think about that USN sub that surfaced too quick and killed all those fisherman. It happens.

reply to post by _Johnny_Utah_


I see your logic here, unfortunately it is not supported by the facts. The government "may" be telling the truth, but have given me enough reason to be thoroughly skeptical of anything they say.

It may be true that 9/11 was carried out entirely by Muslim terrorists. But why all missong facts and scientific anomolies then? And furthermore, were these terrorists merely used as pawns in a larger plot to subvert our freedoms?

reply to post by BlueRaja

Which 9/11 theory should I believe? They can't all be correct. I guess that's better than believing the official theory though, as those people are naive.

No, they can't all be correct. That's why I am still investigating.

The official story has been proven to be false time and time again. If you want to go on believing that the world is flat, you are free to do so.

reply to post by BlueRaja


You throw a vote by making up crazy rules and changing them every year! Over 50,000 ballots tossed out in L.A. because they were registered non-part. & tried to vote Republican. Superdeligates? It all sounds like the tax codes. Make it difficult or impossible to do what you are required to do.
P.S. Long time reader recent poster. I've enjoyed your take on a lot of threads Jack

What would be the reason to "cover-up" the facts of the Flight 800 disaster, if there were not an ongoing conspiracy?

Maybe because it was actually covered-up? there was no need make a conspiracy out of it?

Originally posted by FreeThinkerIdealist


Check the odd coincidences. Bush, Cheney, and crew wanted a 'Pearl Harbor' event before they were in office to proceed with a plan.

Can you show me anywhere on record that Bush and Cheney ever said that they wanted a Pearl Harbor event to occur? Don't go quoting Bill Kristol out of context to show this to be the case. There's a huge difference in observing the fact that certain types of events tend to unify people, and suggesting that such an event should be engineered and carried out.

reply to post by jackinthebox


The entire official story has been proven entirely wrong time and time again, or.... there are some unanswered questions in the official story?

Originally posted by oROSSTAo
reply to post by BlueRaja

 

You throw a vote by making up crazy rules and changing them every year! Over 50,000 ballots tossed out in L.A. because they were registered non-part. & tried to vote Republican. Superdeligates? It all sounds like the tax codes. Make it difficult or impossible to do what you are required to do.
P.S. Long time reader recent poster. I've enjoyed your take on a lot of threads Jack

Thanks.

My point is that the election was very close between Bush and Kerry. It would seem that the votes not counted would have to be very specific ones, to not be obviously tampered with. I haven't seen evidence that Kerry didn't in fact want to be President, so I'm not convinced of him throwing in the towel.

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by _Johnny_Utah_

 

I see your logic here, unfortunately it is not supported by the facts. The government "may" be telling the truth, but have given me enough reason to be thoroughly skeptical of anything they say.

It may be true that 9/11 was carried out entirely by Muslim terrorists. But why all missong facts and scientific anomolies then? And furthermore, were these terrorists merely used as pawns in a larger plot to subvert our freedoms?

facts? And the conspiracy "theories" are? That's why they ae still theories?
Who knows why the science doesn't seem right or line with what we thought it should be? You think it could have a little something to do with two of the largest buildings in the world falling to the ground?
wouldn't it seem all that weight sitting on top of itslf would have an altering effect on itself?

Pawns? That is another example of tossing an idea out there. Is there way to prove that wasn't the case....no.
A lack of proof to one idea is not a proof of another.

Can you show me anywhere on record that Bush and Cheney ever said that they wanted a Pearl Harbor event to occur? Don't go quoting Bill Kristol out of context to show this to be the case. There's a huge difference in observing the fact that certain types of events tend to unify people, and suggesting that such an event should be engineered and carried out.

Very well said!

reply to post by _Johnny_Utah_

Because a person knew or was related to a person who died in 9-11 has nothing whatsoever to do with the subject...nothing.

Well, you can't have it both ways. YOU were the one who said that finding the truth was an "insult" to the families.

"It didn't happen again..." did it? i don't remember seeing anything on the news about that one. I must have not have watched the news or read any papers while passenger jets were being shot down.

No, they hijacked them and slammed them into our most important buildings instead. IF Flight 800 was shot down, we should have been told so that we would know that the threat of terrorists was a clear and present danger.

So let me get this straight...I guess the the terrorists we are fighting now said"hey, we hate you guys, but lets work together on this one!"

Well, there are at least two different lines of thought you can take there. One, that they were duped into doing it. Two, that the "terrorists" we are fighting actually had nothing to do with 9/11.

EDIT to add:

At the time, I lived in Mississippi when they brought the USS Cole into port to get repairs done on it.

I had a friend who was on the Cole when it was attacked. He had to recover the bodies, or what was left of them. He has never recovered mentally.















[edit on 2/12/0808 by jackinthebox]

reply to post by Justin_Case


People of this earth have a RIGHT to know anything that may effect their lives. Whether it is detrimental to national security or not. Just because the government might look bad and may never again be trusted regarding medical issues, I STILL want to know that they knowingly allowed Mercury to be placed in vaccines as a stabilizer.

This cut down on the cost to make the medicine because it allowed it to have a longer shelf life. But to what end? Causing millions of people to have autism. This government exists because of it's people ... not the other way around. The government should recognize this fact and respect the wants and needs of it's people.

Do we NEED to know if the government has extensive knowledge of zero point energy? No. But we WANT to. It would save hundred of thousands of humans' lives in the fight over oil. Would it still profit oil companies if this technology was released to the public. No.

Want vs. Need isn't a very valid argument when the Need to classify something is trivial - such as a company might not be able to make significant profits off of war.