911 Conspiracy Facts - Incriminating

Originally posted by IvanZana
Did the WARGAMES using multiple simulated hijacked aircraft taking place on September 11th aid the 'terrorists' or impede the government?

Quick answer ? ------- No.

Your buddy Mike Ruppert (who I assume it's his website where you are getting your information from) is as usual way off.

The part of the "war games" that you suggest that would have impeded the government I believe was called: Amalgam Virgo

As you can see here that shows absolutely nothing to confirm that Amalgam Virgo was running on 9/11. Further, this explains that the Amalgam Virgo didn't happen until June 2002; the preceding version was "a scenario involving a cruise missile".

The exercise was in the planning stage on 9/11 can be used as evidence that someone was thinking about terrorist hijackings. (no mention of planes being used as missiles though)

There is also:

Timely Alert II

There is not any evidence to show that the normal functions of Fort Monmouth were compromised. Can you show how the functions of Timely Alert II would have had any effect on the outcome of 9/11??

You can also ask about the more popular:

Northern Vigilance.
Yes this was running as you can see in this NORAD press release on September 9th, 2001:
NORAD Maintains Northern Vigilance

web.archive.org...

www.norad.mil...

(link was too long to post. Please enter both addresses without spaces)


This wasn't a war game,it's a real operation, carried out in response to a Russian exercise.

Bottom line...did this have any effect on the response times or amount of "protection?" Again... the answer is no. NORAD reportedly had only 14 fighters on alert on 9/11, and an article in Airman (the “magazine of America’s Air Force”) from 1999 confirmed the same thing. That is, this was the standard number available:

The Air National Guard exclusively performs the air sovereignty mission in the continental United States, and those units fall under the control of the 1st Air Force based at Tyndall. The Guard maintains seven alert sites with 14 fighters and pilots on call around the clock. Besides Homestead, alert birds also sit armed and ready at Tyndall; Langley AFB, Va.; Otis Air National Guard Base, Mass.; Portland International Airport, Ore.; March ARB, Calif.; and Ellington Field, Texas.

www.af.mil...


(thanks again mike!)




[edit on 10/22/0808 by ThroatYogurt]

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt

Originally posted by IvanZana
Did the WARGAMES using multiple simulated hijacked aircraft taking place on September 11th aid the 'terrorists' or impede the government?

The part of the "war games" that you suggest that would have impeded the government I believe was called: Amalgam Virgo

Thank you, I needed clarification on the wargames exercise that impeded the governments response to the hijackings.

i]reply to post by IvanZana



So.... while the government has consistently stated that it did not know where the aircraft were before they struck, watch this short video clip of the Secretary of Transportation's testimony before the 9/11 Commission shows that Cheney monitored flight 77 for many miles as it approached the Pentagon.

How could one of the most heavily-defended buildings in the world have been successfully attacked, when the Vice President of the United States, in charge of counter-terrorism on 9/11, watched it approach from many miles away?



[edit on 23-10-2008 by IvanZana]

Originally posted by IvanZana
Thank you, I needed clarification on the wargames exercise that impeded the governments response to the hijackings.

Do you think your fooling anyone Ivan? Unlike you, people CAN read. You failed...again.

reply to post by ThroatYogurt


Vanity Fair reports that the “day’s exercise” (presumably Vigilant Guardian) is “designed to run a range of scenarios, including a ‘traditional’ simulated hijack in which politically motivated perpetrators commandeer an aircraft, land on a Cuba-like island, and seek asylum.” www.vanityfair.com...


From the NORAD tapes.
"08:43:06
FOX: I've never seen so much real-world stuff happen during an exercise."
Listen to the clip HERE
www.vanityfair.com...

"BOSTON CENTER: Hi. Boston Center T.M.U. [Traffic Management Unit], we have a problem here. We have a hijacked aircraft headed towards New York, and we need you guys to, we need someone to scramble some F-16s or something up there, help us out.
POWELL: Is this real-world or exercise?
BOSTON CENTER: No, this is not an exercise, not a test"
Listen HERE

"08:37:56
WATSON: What?
DOOLEY: Whoa!
WATSON: What was that?
ROUNTREE: Is that real-world?
DOOLEY: Real-world hijack.
WATSON: Cool!"
Listen HERE


""When they told me there was a hijack, my first reaction was 'Somebody started the exercise early,'" Nasypany later told me. The day's exercise was designed to run a range of scenarios, including a "traditional" simulated hijack in which politically motivated perpetrators commandeer an aircraft, land on a Cuba-like island, and seek asylum. "I actually said out loud, 'The hijack's not supposed to be for another hour,'" Nasypany recalled. (The fact that there was an exercise planned for the same day as the attack factors into several conspiracy theories, though the 9/11 commission dismisses this as coincidence."www.vanityfair.com...



[edit on 23-10-2008 by IvanZana]

Originally posted by IvanZana

So.... while the government has consistently stated that it did not know where the aircraft were before they struck,

Wow, you are batting 1.000 here tonight. You didn't even attempt to read ANY of the links I provided regarding Norman Mineta. How many stars did you get for the OP?

Oh Ivan... make sure if you are going to source the VF article....post the last paragraph:

When I asked Nasypany about the conspiracy theories—the people who believe that he, or someone like him, secretly ordered the shootdown of United 93 and covered it up—the corners of his mouth began to quiver. Then, I think to the surprise of both of us, he suddenly put his head in his hands and cried. "Flight 93 was not shot down," he said when he finally looked up. "The individuals on that aircraft, the passengers, they actually took the aircraft down. Because of what those people did, I didn't have to do anything."

Originally posted by IvanZana
Vanity Fair reports that the “day’s exercise” (presumably Vigilant Guardian) is “designed to run a range of scenarios, including a ‘traditional’ simulated hijack in which politically motivated perpetrators commandeer an aircraft, land on a Cuba-like island, and seek asylum.”

www.vanityfair.com...


In regards to Vigilant Guardian it was a single plane, presumably flying outside of US airspace, and not being used as a weapon.

An hour into his shift, something unscripted happens. NORAD's Northeast Air Defence Sector (NEADS), based in Rome, N.Y., contacts the mountain.

The Federal Aviation Administration has evidence of a hijacking and is asking for NORAD support. This is not part of the exercise.
In a flash, Operation Northern Vigilance is called off. Any simulated information, what's known as an "inject," is purged from the screens

www.911readingroom.org...

In addition, testimony to the 9/11 Commission said it only took “30 seconds” to adjust to the situation, and as the required staff were at their stations the response was, if anything, better:

116. On 9/11, NORAD was scheduled to conduct a military exercise, Vigilant Guardian, which postulated a bomber attack from the former Soviet Union. We investigated whether military preparations for the large-scale exercise compromised the military’s response to the realworld terrorist attack on 9/11. According to General Eberhart, “it took about 30 seconds” to make the adjustment to the real-world situation. Ralph Eberhart testimony, June 17, 2004. We found that the response was, if anything, expedited by the increased number of staff at the sectors and at NORAD because of the scheduled exercise.

See Robert Marr interview (Jan. 23, 2004)
Footnote to Chapter 1, 9/11 Commission Report

Bottom line, Vigilant Guardian was planned to include a hijacking exercise. This wasn't scheduled to happen until after late morning on the 11th, though, and so it never took place. Any "confusion" was limited to the time it took to explain to people that this was "real world", not "exercise", and overall response time may have marginally improved as staff were immediately available to be called upon. And despite the myriad of articles written on this topic, there's still not a lot of evidence to show the exercise delayed any response to the hijackings.

Regardless of the legitimacy or lack thereof, of the attack on new york, the deaths of the thousands of vitims on that day , were used as an excuse to murder more than a million Iraqi civillians.
The maths dont work. The facts are now irrelevant, because the US government obviously think that Eye for an Eye , means all your eyes , for one of mine. Even if the terror attack was nothing more than a islamo-fascist murder plan, the response was heavier than it should have been, and made some rich folks , more money than is reasonable. I would love to know how the neocons are doing during this credit crunch . Just a thought.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

reply to post by ThatsJustWeird


I'm sorry but I have nothing to say to your virtual reality......

You go against what I say, yet haven't answered or tackled any of my questions. You have failed common sense, I can't argue nonsense.
Your so focused on "you" been right your wallowed behind your government and your own fantasy of the world.


The world is a crazy place and crazy things happen, you better wake up to the fact

Originally posted by mind is the universe
I'm sorry but I have nothing to say to your virtual reality......

You go against what I say, yet haven't answered or tackled any of my questions. You have failed common sense, I can't argue nonsense.
Your so focused on "you" been right your wallowed behind your government and your own fantasy of the world.


The world is a crazy place and crazy things happen, you better wake up to the fact

What a bunch of nonsense.
1. What haven't I answered?
2. Of course if you're wrong I'm going to go against what you say, lol
3. Where have I agreed with the government?

You guys say all that crap but have yet to back it up....

4. Why do you guys always do this? Someone questions you on something and all you do is come up with some BS like "you're a disinfo agent" "you're supporting the government" blah blah blah. How about cutting the BS, and just address the simple questions or statements.

reply to post by ThatsJustWeird



What have you backed up? who are you backing up.

I haven't claimed any conspiracy. I just shown an observation, on Bush in the classroom during 9/11 Do I need to prove what?

You keep saying another thing, the Neocons/elites keep failing, I asked you what. Twice


You've failed to answer me, lay off the arrogance and do your homework.


[edit on 23-10-2008 by mind is the universe]

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

I still find this one interesting, Considering he really did shake in his little boots. Like his inner voice went into overdrive and fear of any deception coming out The behaviour is proof.





www.youtube.com... - this is the link I want to post directly onto here.
EDIT: Guys how do you post the Vid link. Why does it have to be complicated. I posted the Url, is that not enough?

Where the hell have you been all these years. The amount of lies and deception spewed by this administration, is obvious enough for a 4 year old child to cop on and realise.

So, their plans aren't working. Right.
Like I said.

Don't mean to be blunt, but can I ask what age are you roughly, just for me to make a proper judgment of this reply? You keep saying these or those plans are not working? WHAT plans? WHO is failing? You got to be more specific for christ sakes.

You didn't address my post at all.
Again, they had the "sheeple" on their side!
They had the means.
They had the manpower.
They had the support.
etc.
etc.

Yet the all powerful neocons didn't finish the job.

Your post's make less and less sense as each new one is posted I'm afraid to say.

But in that response, tell us what we don't know already
And you say it again, what did the Neocons not finish? If your going to say such statements, you've got to explain them. They are not even facts to begin with just utter nonsense that you refuse to explain or back up.

Nonsense. You're telling me their able to plan and execute something like 9/11 and all the other allpowerful stuff you claim they do and plan with godlike foresight, yet couldn't see that? lol

Well if the government can't create a 9/11, then terrorist's can't either.

Can I ask are you getting paid to say jargon?

Is this opinion or fact?

Take it which way you like


[edit on 23-10-2008 by mind is the universe]

[edit on 23-10-2008 by mind is the universe]

[edit on 23-10-2008 by mind is the universe]

Originally posted by mind is the universe
What have you backed up? who are you backing up.

In terms of what?

I haven't claimed any conspiracy. I just shown an observation, on Bush in the classroom during 9/11 Do I need to prove what?

What are you talking about?
You said cameras aren't around Bush at other public events but they were there then. I told you that is false. Because it is....

You keep saying another thing, the Neocons/elites keep failing, I asked you what. Twice

No you haven't. But anyway, you claim these all powerful neocons are taking over the world or dominating the middle east.
What are you basing this on seeing as they have stopped the first time they were there and are now failing miserably there (in the mid east) now. Failing as in losing support, not dominating anything, etc.
I've asked you, if they are so powerful 1) why did they stop the first time and 2) why are they having such a hard time now.

You've failed to answer me, lay off the arrogance and do your homework.

I have addressed every one of your statements directed at me. If I missed something please let me know so I can go over it.

Vanity Fair reports that the “day’s exercise” (presumably Vigilant Guardian) is “designed to run a range of scenarios, including a ‘traditional’ simulated hijack in which politically motivated perpetrators commandeer an aircraft, land on a Cuba-like island, and seek asylum.” www.vanityfair.com...¤tPage=all


From the NORAD tapes.
"08:43:06
FOX: I've never seen so much real-world stuff happen during an exercise."
Listen to the clip HERE
www.vanityfair.com...¤tPage=all

"BOSTON CENTER: Hi. Boston Center T.M.U. [Traffic Management Unit], we have a problem here. We have a hijacked aircraft headed towards New York, and we need you guys to, we need someone to scramble some F-16s or something up there, help us out.
POWELL: Is this real-world or exercise?
BOSTON CENTER: No, this is not an exercise, not a test"
Listen HERE

"08:37:56
WATSON: What?
DOOLEY: Whoa!
WATSON: What was that?
ROUNTREE: Is that real-world?
DOOLEY: Real-world hijack.
WATSON: Cool!"
Listen HERE


""When they told me there was a hijack, my first reaction was 'Somebody started the exercise early,'" Nasypany later told me. The day's exercise was designed to run a range of scenarios, including a "traditional" simulated hijack in which politically motivated perpetrators commandeer an aircraft, land on a Cuba-like island, and seek asylum. "I actually said out loud, 'The hijack's not supposed to be for another hour,'" Nasypany recalled. (The fact that there was an exercise planned for the same day as the attack factors into several conspiracy theories, though the 9/11 commission dismisses this as coincidence."www.vanityfair.com...¤tPage=all

THE 9/11 COVER-UP, 2001-2006

Who Is Osama Bin Ladin?
a. Who judges which of the many conflicting and dubious statements and videos attributed to Osama Bin Ladin are genuine, and which are fake? The most important Osama Bin Ladin video (Nov. 2001), in which he supposedly confesses to masterminding 9/11, appears to be a fake. In any event, the State Department''s translation of it is fraudulent.
b. Did Osama Bin Ladin visit Dubai and meet a CIA agent in July 2001 (Le Figaro)? Was he receiving dialysis in a Pakistani military hospital on the night of September 10, 2001 (CBS)?
c. Whether by Bush or Clinton: Why is Osama always allowed to escape?
d. The terror network associated with Osama, known as the "data base" (al-Qaeda), originated in the CIA-sponsored 1980s anti-Soviet jihad in Afghanistan. When did this network stop serving as an asset to covert operations by US intelligence and allied agencies? What were its operatives doing in Kosovo, Bosnia and Chechnya in the years prior to 9/11?

All the Signs of a Systematic 9/11 Cover-up
a. Airplane black boxes were found at Ground Zero, according to two first responders and an unnamed NTSB official, but they were "disappeared" and their existence is denied in The 9/11 Commission Report.
b. US officials consistently suppressed and destroyed evidence (like the tapes recorded by air traffic controllers who handled the New York flights).
c. Whistleblowers (like Sibel Edmonds and Anthony Shaffer) were intimidated, gagged and sanctioned, sending a clear signal to others who might be thinking about speaking out.
d. Officials who "failed" (like Myers and Eberhard, as well as Frasca, Maltbie and Bowman of the FBI) were given promotions.

Poisoning New York
The White House deliberately pressured the EPA into giving false public assurances that the toxic air at Ground Zero was safe to breathe. This knowingly contributed to an as-yet unknown number of health cases and fatalities, and demonstrates that the administration does consider the lives of American citizens to be expendable on behalf of certain interests.

Disposing of the Crime Scene
The rapid and illegal scrapping of the WTC ruins at Ground Zero disposed of almost all of the structural steel indispensable to any investigation of the collapse mechanics. (See also item no. 23, below.)

Anthrax
Mailings of weapons-grade anthrax - which caused a practical suspension of the 9/11 investigations - were traced back to US military stock. Soon after the attacks began in October 2001, the FBI approved the destruction of the original samples of the Ames strain, disposing of perhaps the most important evidence in identifying the source of the pathogens used in the mailings. Were the anthrax attacks timed to coincide with the Afghanistan invasion? Why were the letters sent only to media figures and to the leaders of the opposition in the Senate (who had just raised objections to the USA PATRIOT Act)?

The Stonewall
a. Colin Powell promised a "white paper" from the State Department to establish the authorship of the attacks by al-Qaeda. This was never forthcoming, and was instead replaced by a paper from Tony Blair, which presented only circumstantial evidence, with very few points actually relating to September 11th.
b. Bush and Cheney pressured the (freshly-anthraxed) leadership of the Congressional opposition into delaying the 9/11 investigation for months. The administration fought against the creation of an independent investigation for more than a year.
c. The White House thereupon attempted to appoint Henry Kissinger as the chief investigator, and acted to underfund and obstruct the 9/11 Commission.

A Record of Official Lies
a. "No one could have imagined planes into buildings" - a transparent falsehood upheld repeatedly by Rice, Rumsfeld and Bush.
b. "Iraq was connected to 9/11" - The most "outrageous conspiracy theory" of all, with the most disastrous impact.

Pakistani Connection - Congressional Connection
a. The Pakistani intelligence agency ISI, creator of the Taliban and close ally to both the CIA and "al-Qaeda," allegedly wired $100,000 to Mohamed Atta just prior to September 11th, reportedly through the ISI asset Omar Saeed Sheikh (later arrested for the killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, who was investigating ISI connections to "al-Qaeda.")
b. This was ignored by the congressional 9/11 investigation, although the senator and congressman who ran the probe (Bob Graham and Porter Goss) were meeting with the ISI chief, Mahmud Ahmed, on Capitol Hill on the morning of September 11th.
c. About 25 percent of the report of the Congressional Joint Inquiry was redacted, including long passages regarding how the attack (or the network allegedly behind it) was financed. Graham later said foreign allies were involved in financing the alleged terror network, but that this would only come out in 30 years.

Unanswered Questions and the "Final Fraud" of the 9/11 Commission:
a. The September 11th families who fought for and gained an independent investigation (the 9/11 Commission) posed 400-plus questions, which the 9/11 Commission adopted as its roadmap. The vast majority of these questions were completely ignored in the Commission hearings and the final report.
b. The membership and staff of the 9/11 Commission displayed awesome conflicts of interest. The families called for the resignation of Executive Director Philip Zelikow, a Bush administration member and close associate of "star witness" Condoleezza Rice, and were snubbed. Commission member Max Cleland resigned, condemning the entire exercise as a "scam" and "whitewash."
c.The 9/11 Commission Report is notable mainly for its obvious omissions, distortions and outright falsehoods - ignoring anything incompatible with the official story, banishing the issues to footnotes, and even dismissing the still-unresolved question of who financed 9/11 as being "of little practical significance."

Crown Witnesses Held at Undisclosed Locations
The alleged masterminds of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohamed (KSM) and Ramzi Binalshibh, are reported to have been captured in 2002 and 2003, although one Pakistani newspaper said KSM was killed in an attempted capture. They have been held at undisclosed locations and their supposed testimonies, as provided in transcript form by the government, form much of the basis for The 9/11 Commission Report (although the Commission''s request to see them in person was denied). After holding them for years, why doesn''t the government produce these men and put them to trial?

Spitzer Redux
a. Eliot Spitzer, attorney general of New York State, snubbed pleas by New York citizens to open 9/11 as a criminal case (Justicefor911.org).
b. Spitzer also refused to allow his employee, former 9/11 Commission staff member Dietrich Snell, to testify to the Congress about his (Snell''s) role in keeping "Able Danger" entirely out of The 9/11 Commission Report.

NIST Omissions
After the destruction of the WTC structural steel, the official Twin Towers collapse investigation was left with almost no forensic evidence, and thus could only provide dubious computer models of ultimately unprovable hypotheses. It failed to even test for the possibility of explosives. (Why not clear this up?)

Radio Silence
The 9/11 Commission and NIST both allowed the continuing cover-up of how Motorola''s faulty radios, purchased by the Giuliani administration, caused firefighter deaths at the WTC - once again showing the expendability, even of the first responders.

The Legal Catch-22
a. Hush Money - Accepting victims'' compensation barred September 11th families from pursuing discovery through litigation.
b. Judge Hallerstein - Those who refused compensation to pursue litigation and discovery had their cases consolidated under the same judge (and as a rule dismissed).

Saudi Connections
a. The 9/11 investigations made light of the "Bin Ladin Airlift" during the no-fly period, and ignored the long-standing Bush family business ties to the Bin Ladin family fortune. (A company in which both families held interests, the Carlyle Group, was holding its annual meeting on September 11th, with George Bush Sr., James Baker, and two brothers of Osama Bin Ladin in attendance.)
b. The issue of Ptech.

Media Blackout of Prominent Doubters
The official story has been questioned and many of the above points were raised by members of the US Congress, retired high-ranking officers of the US military, the three leading third-party candidates for President in the 2004 election, a member of the 9/11 Commission who resigned in protest, a former high-ranking adviser to the George W. Bush administration, former ministers to the German, British and Canadian governments, the commander-in-chief of the Russian air force, 100 luminaries who signed the "9/11 Truth Statement," and the presidents of Iran and Venezuela. Not all of these people agree fully with each other, but all would normally be considered newsworthy. Why has the corporate-owned US mass media remained silent about these statements, granting due coverage only to the comments of actor Charlie Sheen?

Originally posted by mind is the universe
www.youtube.com... - this is the link I want to post directly onto here.

What is this
I asked for videos of Bush where he's asked tough questions about 9/11 not Howard Dean.
And Bush acts like that all the time in every situation. That is another kink in your thoughts that the neocons are responsible for all the bad in the world. Why in the world would they pick Bush to be president? Especially if they were going to execute something like 9/11.

Where the hell have you been all these years. The amount of lies and deception spewed by this administration, is obvious enough for a 4 year old child to cop on and realise.

Exactly.
Which tells you what? It tells you:
1. They're not as powerful as you claim, if people can see right through them.
2. They're not good at covering up anything.

Don't mean to be blunt, but can I ask what age are you roughly, just for me to make a proper judgment of this reply? You keep saying these or those plans are not working? WHAT plans? WHO is failing? You got to be more specific for christ sakes.

Wow. I responded DIRECTLY to your quote. Which is why your statement is directly above my response. Everything you need to know is in YOUR quote. lol

You're claiming the NeoCons are doing this and that. Set out to dominate the middle east, etc. But they're not doing anything. They have failed in the middle east. They have lost all the support they had. And so on.

Your post's make less and less sense as each new one is posted I'm afraid to say.

That because you're obviously forgetting your own statements.
We were talking about your claims of the NeoCons dominating the ME. As we were talking and you failed to address, during the first gulf war they had the support, they had the manpower, they had everythng. So why did they stop!?

But in that response, tell us what we don't know already

And you say it again, what did the Neocons not finish? If your going to say such statements, you've got to explain them. They are not even facts to begin with just utter nonsense that you refuse to explain or back up.

Wow man. If you simply just READ THE F'ING QUOTE ABOVE MINE you would see what I'm talking about
It's not that hard, especially since they're YOUR quotes. Are you seriously forgetting what was being discussed?

Nonsense. You're telling me their able to plan and execute something like 9/11 and all the other allpowerful stuff you claim they do and plan with godlike foresight, yet couldn't see that? lol

Well if the government can't create a 9/11, then terrorist's can't either.

That makes no sense. The terrorist wouldn't care what the people think of them.
Where are you getting that I said the gov couldn't create a 9/11?
Your statement was that the NeoCons failed to see the truth movement coming. Why in the world would terrorists care about that? If it was them then they'd embrace it as it takes the spotlight off of them.

Can I ask are you getting paid to say jargon?

Please. I WISH I could get paid for pointing out SIMPLE errors.
Who's paying you to spew these errors?

Originally posted by IvanZana
Vanity Fair reports ...... spam.... repeat post.... ignored explanation....

Ivan,

Why are you ignoring my last response to this identical post.

Why do you repeat posts over and over AFTER you are shown you are wrong, or simple explanations to your conspiracy?

Oh... and since I total destroyed your OP... you are once again moving the goal posts... I will have to read your NEW post and if I have time...will educate you further.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird


I asked for videos of Bush where he's asked tough questions about 9/11 not Howard Dean.
And Bush acts like that all the time in every situation. That is another kink in your thoughts that the neocons are responsible for all the bad in the world. Why in the world would they pick Bush to be president? Especially if they were going to execute something like 9/11.

You know the Government are trying to have the consitution changed, that if we were to accused them of been the terrorists, we would be deemed terrorists or a threat etc. Bush was never allowed to be asked tough questions, even if he was asked, he either got angry or didn't answer. Plus the fact the interviews are carefully monitored. It's Ironic that he has made so many public appearance stating, that people who believe in conspiracy against the government on 9/11, are deluded and not to be listened too etc.

To me that, is such a dead giveaway, for their defence.

For example, Bush was very in control and on the ball,
In the Irish interview in 2006, youtube "banned Bush interview" He wasn't percieved as dumb here. Since he was well able to deter the tough questions and sneak around the lies. After the interview, he was not happy about how forward she was. In fact he thought she was even rude to be interviewing him the way he did.

You know, we Irish people, were shocked, to hear this scum, think of himself as godsent in his stance with been interviewed.


But anyway what is your perception by "tough" questions to Bush?


Bush doesn't act like he does in the video that I posted above all the time, I'm sorry to say. But your perceptions are not well developed. He was cleary panicking and his face was shown nothing but fear of been cot out on lies, as to whatever he was hiding will be revealed in the coming months I'm sure. His body language was very obvoius. Bush does not act like this all time. He was red faced. That is very incorrect judgment. Your very unspecific in your points and opinions..

Bush was picked, for many reasons, like any other president. In this case To be the genious that he is, and to show the world hes an illerate stupid fool that can't seem to do anything right. But still gets the job done and put the world into raging wars and a created finacial crisis for his cronies. He stuck right by his own political agenda. As far as wall street and the bankers are concerned, Bush was terrific.

He's at home rolling his eyes to people like you, who live in fantasy.

Exactly.
Which tells you what? It tells you:
1. They're not as powerful as you claim, if people can see right through them.
2. They're not good at covering up anything.

Oh yeah, you keep saying that, this is how sheeple react, when they are not fully aware. Of course there are powerful, they have thousands of troops fighting in wars for them, that shows power I'm afraid.


Seriously what age are you? Do you actually understand what happening in the real world? So if 9/11 is a coverup don't you think, they have covered their asses quite well

You're claiming the NeoCons are doing this and that. Set out to dominate the middle east, etc. But they're not doing anything. They have failed in the middle east. They have lost all the support they had. And so on.

What have they failed, really I don't get what you mean by they failed. It's the American solidier's that are dieing over there not them. The regimes over the last 50 years have worked for time policy that was brought there by American interest, where dictators were called in and other political goals were done to achieve political control over the regions. I.e Saddam rise to power pre gulf war, was given all the weapons he needed from the US etc. Iran in 1979 for example too. George Senior had the business with Saddam. Then Saddam breaks the deal and has enough of the dirty business with the American elites, Saddam has complete control of the country and oil, he can do what he pleases. its perfect opportunity for America to invade and then overthrow him, thus having the peoples support. Government's throughout history has incited incidents for wars to break out, or to create an opportunity for one.

As far as the Neocons perspective, they achieved many goals, you just refuse to see that. The CIA have been in the ME making millions on selling arms. The US has taken over the country of Iraq for example, and the oil etc. The neocons will not stop until they have control of the ME. Look at the war games the elites are creating with Israel and Iran. Iran doesn't want to attack Israel, certainly the jewish don't Israel to bomb either. Yet the Neocons, Zionist's and Elites are all plotting for this war to happen, if this war happens, it mean's they have acheived their goals, not failed.

So you really need to explain, what exactly you mean Neocons having failed.

And your last response was "and so on" is that a reason too? Honest to god, what planet do you live in?

That because you're obviously forgetting your own statements.

We were talking about your claims of the NeoCons dominating the ME. As we were talking and you failed to address, during the first gulf war they had the support, they had the manpower, they had everythng. So why did they stop!?

Because they had plans drawn up, you know and everyone knows. Any of these wars and regimes, are planned well in advanced. IMO. I think they took a step back, mainly because they either A. got what they wanted. B. let saddam live under sanctions and then take him out the easyway by having the world by American's side. Like The American government, as I said to you in the beginning need to have the good image, so the people are behind them 100% and the people will go and fight these war, with the trust they have within the governments.

The fact that the gulf war having support, shows the fallacy of peoples minds back then. And how brainswashed people like you are.

Supporting violence and retailating to violence, is stupid.

That makes no sense. The terrorist wouldn't care what the people think of them.

Wait, Just because it doesn't make sense to you, does not mean it's not logical.

You said Government can't create 9/11 as they are not god lol

Well then it takes god, to create 9/11. Terrorists then couldn't have created 9/11, based on that logic of yours. Btw do you know the American government sells arms to terrorists all over the world? Just a quick punchline there for you, because you either are now supporting the government or your blinded by reality.

Where are you getting that I said the gov couldn't create a 9/11?

I quoted it above already

Your statement was that the NeoCons failed to see the truth movement coming. Why in the world would terrorists care about that? If it was them then they'd embrace it as it takes the spotlight off of them.

Incoherent rambling, and reducing yoursef to trolling. Please quote that I actually said this, because I know you will have trouble finding these "quotes"





[edit on 23-10-2008 by mind is the universe]