911 Poll

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999


Swampy you can't even see that the JCS recommending that the US military attack it's own citizens is a violation of the law?

What about the oath to protect and defend the constitution of the US?

It's one thing if Joe Schmoe concocts some fantasy in his mind, it is quite another when people with the means to carry out a plan propose the plan. This was no game this was SOP at the pentagon and the CIA. Kennedy was appalled, how had our country drifted so far into the realm of insanity. I think one reason was the idea of situational ethics or the truth as something relative and secondary to goals. It's very easy to justify lying and murder with these guiding principles.

No, I do not believe that we were told the truth about what happened on that day, 9/11/01.

reply to post by impressme


I signed up today just so I could add my pov which is:

No --- I do not believe that the US Government has told us the truth regarding 9/11

No way, they are not fooling me.

Imploding buildings falling at free fall speed only happenes when it is planned.



is there anyone at ATS that thinks Al-Qaeda exists anyway???

Ya these alleged Officers are constantly engaging in various forms of pomp and circumstance,including,generally the taking of oaths.Fact is they knew they were on the wrong side,the dark side.Too much power is what we see here,friends.And their little toadies.

Wouldn't it be hilarious if one day he/she/it/them were on everyone's ignore?Not believed nor even heard.

reply to post by Leo Strauss

Swampy you can't even see that the JCS recommending that the US military attack it's own citizens is a violation of the law?

You should actually read the document

"2. A series of well coordinated incidents will be planned to take place in and around the Guantanamo to give genuine appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces.

a. Incidents to establish a credible attack (not in chronological order):

(1) Start rumors (many). Use clandestine radio.
(2) Land friendly Cubans in uniform "over-the-fence" to stage attack on base.
(3) Capture Cuban (friendly) saboteurs inside the base.
(4) Start riots near the base main gate (friendly Cubans)
(5) Blow up ammunition inside the base; start fires.
(6) Burn aircraft on air base (sabotage)
(7) Lob mortar shells from outside of base into base. Some damage to installations.
(8) Capture assault teams approaching from the sea or vicinity of Guantanamo City.
(9) Capture militia groups which storms the base.
(10) Sabotage ship in harbor; large fires -- napthalene.
(11) Sink ship near harbor entrance. Conduct funerals for mock-victims (may be lieu of (10))."

So far, going through the documents, I have yet to see something that calls for an actual attack on United States citizens. I will keep looking, but so far, everything I have read backs up what I have been saying. Absent an actual crime (and so far, none of the documents points to ANY crimes against American citizens) the only way to take care of the issue was to reassign or encourage to retire, those officers involved with the planning.

No, they have not told the whole truth.

That said, I am more inclined to believe that the cover-up was related to the complete failure of our government to prevent 9/11. I think it very likely that the investigation showed far more damning evidence than we will ever know detailing the true level of prior knowledge we had regarding the terrorist attacks of 9/11.

Less likely (IMO) is any cover-up regarding the collapse of the Twin Towers, and later WTC 7. Having looked at the evidence on both sides, the failure of the buildings due to structural damage via impact and/or fire damage strikes me as being both reasonable, and likely.

The crash in Shanksville - would not surprise me in the least to discover it was shot down and has since been covered up.

Originally posted by Kaztronic
No, they have not told the whole truth.

That said, I am more inclined to believe that the cover-up was related to the complete failure of our government to prevent 9/11. I think it very likely that the investigation showed far more damning evidence than we will ever know detailing the true level of prior knowledge we had regarding the terrorist attacks of 9/11.

Less likely (IMO) is any cover-up regarding the collapse of the Twin Towers, and later WTC 7. Having looked at the evidence on both sides, the failure of the buildings due to structural damage via impact and/or fire damage strikes me as being both reasonable, and likely.

The crash in Shanksville - would not surprise me in the least to discover it was shot down and has since been covered up.

My thoughts almost to a tee.

But unfortunately the poll will be waved around later to prove that 99 per cent of people (or something) agree with the Truth Movement.

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
So far, going through the documents, I have yet to see something that calls for an actual attack on United States citizens.

Did you see this?:

We could sink a boatload of Cubans en route to Florida (real or simulated)

whatreallyhappened.com...


That alone is enough to get people indicted and immediately fired. Planning a potential attack on foreign citizens/property without approval from Congress.

You are seriously off your rocker if you think Operation Northwoods was a legitimate and legal plan. The military must have hardcore brainwashed you into being completely insensitive to constitutional law or how wars are SUPPOSED to be fought through all their abuses. Remind me to completely disregard all your commentary and opinions from now on. You would probably have aided them with Northwoods if they asked you at the time, wouldn't you?

reply to post by bsbray11

You are seriously off your rocker if you think Operation Northwoods was a legitimate and legal plan. The military must have hardcore brainwashed you into being completely insensitive to constitutional law or how wars are SUPPOSED to be fought through all their abuses. Remind me to completely disregard all your commentary and opinions from now on. You would probably have aided them with Northwoods if they asked you at the time, wouldn't you?

And yet another example of why I normally ignore you. You make leaps in your logic that Evel Kinevel wouldnt attempt. I could point out to you that the Constitution applies to United States citizens, but you wouldnt understand that. I could point out that the 60s were quite a bit different from today, you wouldnt get that either. I could point out that several laws were passed in the 70s as a direct result of what happened in the 60s, but you wouldnt get that either. I could also point out that Operation Northwoods was but ONE of a couple dozen ideas for dealing with Castro, but you've fixated on it and it alone appearantly. I could once again point out the very strained relationship between JFK and the military at that point in time and that JFK couldnt demand Lemnitizer resign....especially since it was the NCA's (JFK) directive to look for ways to topple Castro...but that Kennedy did the only thing he could do, but you havent understood that yet....and probably wont.



Then, there is your disgusting statement that you think I would help with sinking a boatload of innocents.....that one takes the cake and shows me just how far from reality you reside.

o.k. then count my vote as a No they didn't tell the truth..
There is too many hole where the government should have known the information.

Update to the poll.

No 379 voted, the government lied about 911.
Yes 20 voted, the government told the truth about 911.

I will continue counting as more votes come in.


[edit on 1-2-2010 by impressme]

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Then, there is your disgusting statement that you think I would help with sinking a boatload of innocents.....that one takes the cake and shows me just how far from reality you reside.

The way you are on here defending the legality of a false flag event meant to fool an entire nation into war, you really make me wonder what you would care if 9/11 was an inside job anyway.

This mirrors other polls actually. The majority of Americans do not believe their government. Heck, anyone who does even a little research will soon realize just what a bold-faced lie the whole thing really is. The "mastermind" of 9-11 isn't even the guy the government claims him to be.

David E. Klett, a retired professor of thermodynamics, had the real KSM in several of his classes. Asked about the photos of the person said to be the terror mastermind, Klett said, "I did not recognize that person. I never saw that face before."

SOURCE: www.bollyn.com...

Originally posted by impressme
Update to the poll.

No 379 voted, the government lied about 911.
Yes 20 voted, the government told the truth about 911.

I will continue counting as more votes come in.


[edit on 1-2-2010 by impressme]

380

no

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
So far, going through the documents, I have yet to see something that calls for an actual attack on United States citizens.

Did you see this?:

We could sink a boatload of Cubans en route to Florida (real or simulated)

whatreallyhappened.com...


That alone is enough to get people indicted and immediately fired. Planning a potential attack on foreign citizens/property without approval from Congress.

You are seriously off your rocker if you think Operation Northwoods was a legitimate and legal plan. The military must have hardcore brainwashed you into being completely insensitive to constitutional law or how wars are SUPPOSED to be fought through all their abuses. Remind me to completely disregard all your commentary and opinions from now on. You would probably have aided them with Northwoods if they asked you at the time, wouldn't you?

Hang on. You loftily dismissed Swampfox as a dissembler when he characterised a man being removed from his post as "firing", and sanctimoniously suggested that you were thus able to ignore anything he wrote from then on.

He's just shown that you equally mischaracterised something. In fact, I think your mistake is worse, since you suggested that it might form the basis of a prosecution. So your carping about "disregarding" people's commentary rings a little hollow. Indeed it even sounds rather hypocritical.

reply to post by impressme


Chaulk another up for "No, they have not told the truth."

I'm surprised there's not more action over here: AE911 Press Conference - Feb 19th, 2010

[edit on 2/2/2010 by SquirrelNutz]

No, and the FAA's multiple different stories about the time line should be proof to anyone, which are a matter of record.

I did read the document... did you miss this...did you notice the choice between 3A and 3B??????? Real ship or drone?????

3. A "Remember the Maine" incident could be arranged in several forms:

a. We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba.

b. We could blow up a drone (unmanned) vessel anywhere in the Cuban waters. We could arrange to cause such incident in the vicinity of Havana or Santiago as a spectacular result of Cuban attack from the air or sea, or both.

How about this...

4. We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington.

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Leo Strauss

 

Swampy you can't even see that the JCS recommending that the US military attack it's own citizens is a violation of the law?

You should actually read the document

"2. A series of well coordinated incidents will be planned to take place in and around the Guantanamo to give genuine appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces.

a. Incidents to establish a credible attack (not in chronological order):

(1) Start rumors (many). Use clandestine radio.
(2) Land friendly Cubans in uniform "over-the-fence" to stage attack on base.
(3) Capture Cuban (friendly) saboteurs inside the base.
(4) Start riots near the base main gate (friendly Cubans)
(5) Blow up ammunition inside the base; start fires.
(6) Burn aircraft on air base (sabotage)
(7) Lob mortar shells from outside of base into base. Some damage to installations.
(8) Capture assault teams approaching from the sea or vicinity of Guantanamo City.
(9) Capture militia groups which storms the base.
(10) Sabotage ship in harbor; large fires -- napthalene.
(11) Sink ship near harbor entrance. Conduct funerals for mock-victims (may be lieu of (10))."

So far, going through the documents, I have yet to see something that calls for an actual attack on United States citizens. I will keep looking, but so far, everything I have read backs up what I have been saying. Absent an actual crime (and so far, none of the documents points to ANY crimes against American citizens) the only way to take care of the issue was to reassign or encourage to retire, those officers involved with the planning.

[edit on 2-2-2010 by Leo Strauss]

reply to post by impressme


As your poll is on a conspiracy forum it was never likely to be representative of the wider world.

But you have framed the question in such a way that the result is doubly meaningless. There seems to be an implied suggestion that anyone who thinks the US government, or more precisely some of it's agencies, has not told the full unvarnished truth about 9/11 is a "truther", and this just ain't so.

This poll makes no attempt to differentiate between people who think the government and it's agencies have not made full disclosure, for fear of admitting incompetence and negligence, and those extremists who think the gov. and agencies are up to their necks in mass murder.

Why didn't you ask who thinks the US gov. planned and orchestrated mass murder of its own citizens ?