Invasion of Two Innocent Nations! Government Brainwashing!

Brainwashing has two similar definitions. The first is "to impose a set of usually political or religious beliefs on somebody by the use of various coercive methods of indoctrination, including destruction of the victim's prior beliefs", and the second, "to induce somebody to believe or do something, for example, to buy a new product, especially by constant repetition or advertising". The small, corrupt group at the head of our government most definitely attempted and succeeded in imposing its set of political beliefs on most American citizens after its creation of September 11, 2001.

Psychological Warfare to control people's minds is actually considered a science. Link: Click Here For More Info



When the World Trade Center Buildings were demolished, all Americans had questions, and demanded answers. The government had its story ready beforehand, and successfully fed it to the American public and the world. For example, the BBC announced that WTC Building 7 collapsed eighteen minutes before it actually did! How did they know that was going to happen?

Link: BBC Editors have tried to explain that somehow it was a mistake.



In New York City, when an explanation for the collapses was needed, Bush had people on the streets ready to tell his tale. This man's explanation of what he saw seems very suspicious and scripted. Is this how you would react if you saw the events at ground zero? And how does he know that the buildings collapsed due to the heat of the explosion? His purpose is to come across as a normal citizen, but it is obvious that he is there to get Bush's story started.

Link: This issue is also addressed in 9/11 Synthetic Terror, which can now be read online.



Today, most still blindly follow like sheep, believing George Bush and the government's lies. On September 11, television and other media replayed the same message and the same video clips over and over and over 24 hours a day for weeks. The Bush Administration wanted to engrain its version of what happened into the minds of Americans, and succeeded.

A lot of very significant information was left out of these news reports, but has slowly been uncovered by many who question the official government story, also known as 9/11 Truthers. For example, the common American only knows that the two towers collapsed that day, because there was so little attention on World Trade Center Building 7.

Brainwashing relies on repetition. How many times per minute was the footage of the airplanes hitting the Towers shown? How many times per minute was the footage of the Towers collapsing shown? The media engrained those pictures and video clips into the minds of Americans through repetition. The Bush administration and the media convinced the public that airplanes hit the Twin Towers; they caught fire and collapsed. Next, they began to point fingers at who was to blame.

Google Video Link

Continued...

Americans were told that Osama bin Laden planned and carried out the attack on the United States' World Trade Center Buildings and the Pentagon. Bush promised to search and find Bin Laden and the "evildoers", smoke them out of their caves, and bring them to justice. However, the truth is that the Bush Administration knew exactly where Bin Laden was on September 11.

Link: On September 11, Bin Laden was in a military hospital in Rawalpindi on a dialysis machine, looked after by America's ally, Pakistan.

Link: We were told that Bin Laden took credit for the attacks, but he did not.

Link: The "Bin Laden Confession Tape" is a lie.

Link: Bin Laden has consistently said that he was not behind the attacks of September 11.

He may have cheered for those who did it, but didn't do it himself. Bin Laden has radical Islamic views, is a dangerous terrorist, and is a leader in Al Queda, but there has been no concrete proof that he orchestrated the events on 9/11. After Bin Laden was blamed for the attacks, the American public was behind President Bush as he attacked Afghanistan. The truth is, however, that Afghanistan had nothing to do with September 11, and the United States attacked a country that was innocent of the charges against it.



The government used its "smoking gun", the "Bin Laden Confession Tape", as a reason to go to war. The tape was a product of the U.S. Government, in collaboration with Saudi intelligence. Rex Tomb, the FBI's Chief of Investigative Publicity is reported to have said that there is "no hard evidence linking Osama Bin Laden to 9/11".

Link: Bin Laden is said to have been seen in many videos, but one cannot be sure if it is actually Osama Bin Laden or an impersonator.



More Information:

Link: Karl Rove Set Up Bin Laden Tape.

Link: Is Bin Laden Responsible for the 9/11 Attacks?

Link: FBI says it has "No hard evidence connection Bin Laden to 9/11".

Link: FBI: Bin Laden Not Wanted For 9/11?

Iraq was Bush's next target. The world was told that Saddam Hussein had ties to 9/11 by Bush's top government officials. This lie was the basis for our war with Iraq. Brave men and women in the U.S. Military are dying every day because of this lie.

Link: Bush used Saddam Hussein as a justification for taking the United States to War.

Link: U.S. intelligence says there is no evidence linking Hussein to the September 11.



When it was proven that Saddam was not responsible in any way for September 11, and that Saddam in no way financed the terrorist network Al Qaeda, the United States' government administration began its third lie to justify war with Iraq: weapons of mass destruction.



Continued...

[edit on 9-5-2008 by Conspiracy Realist]

After searching all of Iraq, no weapons of mass destruction were ever found. On Thursday, October 7, 2004, CNN reported that "Saddam Hussein did not possess stockpiles of illicit weapons at the time of the U.S. invasion and had not begun any program to produce them".

Link: The Struggle For Iraq. Report: No WMD Stockpiles in Iraq.

The fourth justification for occupying Iraq was "Operation Iraqi Freedom". Bush claimed that the "Mission was Accomplished" on May 1, 2003.

Link: CNN.com - White House "Mission Accomplished" Sign.

Presently, I believe that our forces are there to spread democracy or keep stability in the region or whatever else sounds good on CNN or FOXNews.

Link: Why We Should Exit Iraq Now. Washington Post.



More Information:

Link: Al Qaeda-Hussein Link Is Dismissed. Washington Post.

Link: Iraq Survey Group Report Reveals Claims About Saddam Hussein's WMD Arsenal Don't Hold Water

"Coercive methods of indoctrination" basically means that the government brainwashes its citizens, forcing their beliefs upon them, and programming their minds. This is what our President and those close to him have done through our television media. It is now a fact that we had no business going into Afghanistan, and no business going into Iraq.



The Bottom Line is this: George Bush and friends orchestrated the events of September 11, 2001, to justify war with countries in the Middle East. On that day, over 3,000 American men and women died. The United States then invaded, destroyed, and crippled two countries that had nothing to do with September 11, 2001. The United States is responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent civilians. President Bush successfully led our country and military into unnecessary war, and the cost has been the lives of American soldiers.

Add to these facts the media's completely criminal and reprehensible complicity over these subsequent years, and what we have here folks is a full-blown fascist dictatorship - where your government can call you a terrorist for even questioning their fairy tales about 9/11, and then lock you up and torture you without any chance of a fair trial.

How can this be happening? - it's happening because of the corruption which has overtaken the US government. It's happening because the 5 top corporations who control ALL of the mainstream media are owned by the same people who make the machinery and the bombs of war, it is in their financial interest to keep us in a state of perpetual conflict and confusion at the expense of our freedom, our rights as individuals, and any sense of dignity as human beings.

Peace

CR

Where are all the debunkers (Ignorant)?

"hears crickets"

Peace

CR

I thought that summed it up extremely well indeed!

I have very little knowledge about 9/11 as a whole but i find the subject very interesting.

Thanks for sharing your knowledge.

Vicki

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
I thought that summed it up extremely well indeed!

I have very little knowledge about 9/11 as a whole but i find the subject very interesting.

Thanks for sharing your knowledge.

Vicki

Thank you for your kind words.

If you need more information please feel free to ask.

Peace

CR

Both Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice said had a solid case against Bin Laden and they would present it to the American public. This was prior to discovery of the Bin Laden "confession" tape found in a pile of rubble in Afghanistan. In the end, all they released was the "confession" tape. That was all the solid evidence we were presented. Also, some tapes released since then have been considered fake by FBI officials. Why do people then trust the tape of the confession, when they know other tapes were fake? Most people don't know that Bin Laden issued 2 denials prior to the "confession." The people who do know, will say "Bin Laden is a liar." But then when the "confession" tape is released, they believe him. If he is a liar, he is a liar, but somehow he is only considered a liar when he is going against the official story. When info emerges that supports the official story, it is considered solid evidence.

Bin Laden denies involvement in 9/11 = Liar. Saddam Hussein says he doesn't have wmd's = Liar. Ahmadenajhad says they aren't pursuing nuclear weapons = Liar. But the only person we know is a proven liar is Bush himself, and many others in the administration. Yet we continually side with the people who have been proven to lie to us. Seems odd to me.

Is Iran next? In my opinion. Yes.

If you have been watching the American News, then you've seen and heard the tapes of the interaction between the U.S war ships and Iranian speed boats. Iran is spinning the news so that they look innocent, when in fact the U.S. has them on tape driving their patrol boats dangerously close to its ships.

However, while the Iranians only show their citizens the parts of the encounter where they look to be innocent of wrongdoing and are behaving properly, the United States seems to have taken it a step further... with lies.

On the tapes that were aired on American news channels, a creepy voice is heard saying "I am coming to you. You will explode..." My opinion, from the very second that I saw the news clip, was that this voice was laughable, and extremely, incredibly, obviously fake.

The United States' current administration is intent, in my opinion, to find a reason to go to war with Iran. Months ago we were getting news reports of an "Iranian nuclear threat", and after a few days... nothing. What happened to that sense of urgency that Iran was intent on using nuclear weapons? Was it simply propaganda that's sole objective was to escalate conflict?

In the following BBC news report, the U.S. Navy said that the intimidating voice on the tape threatening to blow up U.S war ships may not have come from the patrol boats. The U.S admits that it could have come from another ship, or even that it was heard from a transmitter on shore.



Furthermore, let's look at the situation in Iraq. First, we were positive that Iraq had ties to Al Queda, and therefore were partially responsible for 911.

When that was proven false, the reason for war changed as discussed previously, to Hussein's compilation of weapons of mass destruction. None were found, and our purpose in Iraq changed again, to free a country from a ruthless dictator (which he most definitely was). Soon it was "Operation Iraqi Freedom". Although President Bush declared "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq, United States' Armed Forces are still there.

The situation in Iraq means nothing to this post; the story's purpose is to show that the United States lies, and those lies lead to unconstitutional wars, and those wars lead to deaths of tens of thousand of American military members and innocent civilians in countries around the globe.

With the United State's record of continuous lies, we should know better than to believe what is told to the American media, and what the American media tells its citizens. At first, the voice was unquestionably from the Iranian patrol boats. Now, the U.S. Navy is telling the BBC that it may have come from another ship? Or from a transmitter on shore?

I'm waiting for the news report:

"Iranian/U.S. Naval Conflict Video a Fake.
Mysterious Voice a Result of False Intelligence".

My only question is: Will we hear this report before or after the war between the United States and Iran?

Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, and other countries in the Middle East have religious fanatic groups and terrorists, but the majority of its people want peace. They are no different from you and me; wanting to live their lives quietly, calmly, and happily. A small percentage of the population is a threat to world peace. Therefore, before one more innocent human life is lost, the United States should abide by the rules set forth in the Constitution in regards to declaring war. The American government must not attack a third country unconstitutionally. While the current U.S administration wants to fuel its money-making military machine by policing other nations and toppling governments.



Peace

CR

reply to post by Conspiracy Realist


Or maybe its because we have already dealt with most of the things you posted long ago?

Its amazing how many people still believe the Bin Laden "denial". You do realize that the denial comes from a magazine story in which NOBODY talked to Bin Laden? The magazine submitted a list of questions to the Taliban government in Afghanistan and they returned the list the next day. They never spoke with Bin Laden, they simply filled in answers that they hoped would prevent the US from invading.


Ah yes the WMD issue....couple problems with that, first, there are currently members of the US military who wear Purple Hearts for "battlefield injuries consistant with exposure to Sarin nerve agents"

Second...well part two of the first I guess.....When US forces took control of an Iraqi base near Karbala, they found a couple of camouflaged (partially underground) bunkers. Inside these bunkers were all the chemicals necessary to make Sarin, Mustard gas and a couple other nasty items. Also in the bunkers were chem warfare suits and artillery rounds, mortar rounds, all designed to carry liquid payloads. It was in the chemical bunker that the troops were overcome.

However, the ISG never declared this as a weapons stockpile...only because the chemicals had not actually been mixed. Kinda like finding Timothy McVeigh in a warehouse with barrels, fuel oil, AmFo and a Ryder truck...but it not being bomb because the fuel and AmFo hadnt been mixed yet.



However

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999


And you have sources to back up your claim? Because i have sources as discussed above of Government Officials admitting there was no evidence of weapons of mass destruction. I'd love to see your evidence?

Peace

CR









Mod Edit: Quote of previous post removed, REPLY TO: function used. Please see Warnings for excessive quoting, and how to quote. Thank you - Jak

[edit on 16/5/08 by JAK]

You speak of Bush as if he is a mastermind. IMO Bush is only a puppet, just as the next president will be.

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999


And it's amazing to be how many people buy the Bin Laden confession tape. Let's leave out the many oddities found within the video and isn't just the discovery of the tape a little suspect?

As for the "questionaire" supposedly sent to the Taliban, this site says differently: 911review.com... CNN is using Bin Laden's denial with quotes: archives.cnn.com...

There are many other, but I believe these two refute your Taliban questionaire statement.

And it is your contention Swampfox that WMD's were found in Iraq? But no one talked about it because the ISG never declared it a stockpile? If this administration had any shred or even a shred of a shred of evidence, they would have stopped all TV programming for 12 hours to announced it. Many agencies told the administration Hussein had no link to Al-Queda, no WMD's, no mobile chemical weapons labs, no nuclear program, no yellow cake uranium, no ability to deliver any WMD's and they completely ignored all this, but they wouldn't say they found chemical weapons because the ISG wouldn't declare it a stockpile? Sounds pretty ridiculous.

reply to post by RomanMaroni

And it is your contention Swampfox that WMD's were found in Iraq? But no one talked about it because the ISG never declared it a stockpile? If this administration had any shred or even a shred of a shred of evidence, they would have stopped all TV programming for 12 hours to announced it. Many agencies told the administration Hussein had no link to Al-Queda, no WMD's, no mobile chemical weapons labs, no nuclear program, no yellow cake uranium, no ability to deliver any WMD's and they completely ignored all this, but they wouldn't say they found chemical weapons because the ISG wouldn't declare it a stockpile? Sounds pretty ridiculous.

Washington – Since 2004, coalition forces have found approximately 500 artillery shells in various locations across Iraq filled with chemical weapons agents, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) told a hearing of the House Armed Services Committee June 29.

----------------------


“[W]e … assess that the chemical munitions that have been found are hazardous, and, potentially, they could be lethal,” Maples said, recalling an incident where coalition forces in Iraq became ill while transporting captured chemical munitions.

Source

Then we have CNN saying the following:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Saddam Hussein did not possess stockpiles of illicit weapons at the time of the U.S. invasion in March 2003 and had not begun any program to produce them, a CIA report concludes.

Source

More sources:

Iraq had no stockpiles of biological, chemical or nuclear weapons before last year's US-led invasion, the chief US weapons inspector has concluded.

Source

WASHINGTON - In his final word, the CIA’s top weapons inspector in Iraq said Monday that the hunt for weapons of mass destruction has “gone as far as feasible” and has found nothing, closing an investigation into the purported programs of Saddam Hussein that were used to justify the 2003 invasion.

Source

Senior American officials concluded at the beginning of last May that there were no weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq, The Observer has learnt. Intelligence sources, policy makers and weapons inspectors familiar with the details of the hunt for WMD told The Observer it was widely known that Iraq had no WMD within three weeks of Baghdad falling, despite the assertions of senior Bush administration figures and the Prime Minister, Tony Blair.

Source

WASHINGTON – President Bush and his vice president conceded yesterday in the clearest terms yet that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction, trying to shift the Iraq war debate to a new issue – whether the invasion was justified because Hussein was abusing a U.N. oil-for-food program.

Source

Heres a lovely video of Bush admitting there was No WMD's:



Peace

CR


[edit on 16-5-2008 by Conspiracy Realist]

reply to post by Boone 870


Boone it says right in the report you cited that those were from the 1980's.

“We … assess that the munitions that are addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s and that they were similar to the munitions that were used during the Iran-Iraq War,” said U.S. Army Major General Michael D. Maples.

Are you suggesting that an invasion would be justified over 500 artillery shell found in various spots throughout the country, made in the 80's justifies an invasion to due WMD's? Where are the laboratories to make these weapons? Let's not forget these weapons don't just appear. They have to be made somewhere. So if indeed they were manufacturing these chemical weapons, we would have found the sites. This is the flaw with the "they must have moved them to Syria" statement. Well, that and the fact we had satellites spying on all parts of Iraq. And where are those mobile chemical weapons labs in the back of semi's that Colin Powell shows "drawings" (not pictures) of? And where are those elaborate underground cave bunkers we were shown "drawings" (not pictures) of in Afghanistan? Answer: we didn't find them because they never existed.

So if the Bush regime was mislead by bad intel, where did this intel come from? I suspect it was from two Iraqis. Why are these two Iraqis not brought to justice for the needless deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people? I doubt it only takes the lies of 2 guys to launch a war. I know it is all about the oil. Any points about the war that don't relate to the oil are worthless.

reply to post by RomanMaroni


You guys might as well stop. Swampfox has always held fast with his belief in this administration. No matter how much real evidence is provided to dispute his claims that weapons were found (at least ones that weren't outdated and used 20 years early in a dispute in which we armed both sides) he will still stand by and claim that these WMDs were found. That we had a right to be in that country killing it's citizens and the non-present Al Qaida. He won't believe anything that refutes his beliefs. I have read MANY threads where he holds this stance and has used this argument.

So keep throwing the evidence at him but I'll tell you this, he won't change. He's sold on this administration and the greatness it has done for this world.

reply to post by dariousg


I know dariousg. My responses really aren't to him. They are intended for anyone reading the thread that might actually think something that was said had some legitimacy. I had to respond to "the Taliban filled out a questonaire" statement. Bin Laden has been quoted in numerous sources, so I just wanted to point that out.

reply to post by RomanMaroni

Boone it says right in the report you cited that those were from the 1980's.

Yes it does.

When they were made is completely irrelevant because Saddam agreed to destroy all of his WMD's as part of the terms of surrender that ended the first Gulf War.

How many United Nation resolutions did Saddam violate? Let me try to remember... oh yeah, now I remember... ALL of them.

Boone, that's pretty weak. I don't seem to recall Colin Powell's mentioning anything about 1980's WMD's in his UN address. Come to think of it, I don't recall anyone saying anything about WMD's from the 80's. The WMD story we were all sold was a story of current WMD's being manufactured, and you and I both know that. You can try to justify that all you want, but we both know the truth.

As far as the UN resolutions, the UN doesn't set policy for the USA. But if you want to go on invasion due to UN resolutions, I guess Israel is next, right? I know you are extremely upset about them violating numerous UN resolutions regarding illegally occupying land. And I'm sure you are extremely upset that they started their nuclear program in secret and lied about it, because that is the same thing Iran is being blamed for. And how exactly do you know Saddam violated all those resolutions? The same people that told us that also told us WMD's, yellow cake uranium, ties to Al-Queda, meetings with AL-Queda leaders, we know exactly where the WMD's are, greeted as liberators, Iraq oil will fund the reconstruction, mobile chemical weapons labs, mushroom cloud ..... There's an old saying in Tennessee and it goes: Fool me once, uhhh, shame ... shame on you ... fool me ... can't get fooled again!