The Undebunkable Video: Eliminate The Impossible

reply to post by hooper

Then why not blame Saddam for 9/11 directly?

Because Osama was the scapegoat. Osama was blamed to justify the invasion of Afghanistan, and the WMDs were the justification for the invasion of Iraq. If Saddam was blamed for the 9/11 attacks, then we would have only had reason to invade Iraq.

Which in turn was spent on wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Net gain - $0.

It's not just about money, it's about the power. It's about having our military scattered comfortably all around the globe.

But there was definitely a monetary element to it IMO: US Identifies $1 Trillion In Mineral Resources. What a lucky coincidence!

Wars are huge moneymakers for people that produce the supplies, the weapons, the armor, the ammunition, the tanks, the bases, and so on. Business is booming for BAE Systems.

Nazi-style? Better read your history, there is a wee difference between the Gestapo and the Department of Homeland Security.

How about the Patriot Act?

Unconstitutionally spying on American citizens under Section 214? Check.

Expanding the governments ability to get information on people from third parties under section 215? Check.

Illegally arresting people and allowing searches without warrants under Section 213? Check.

Elimination of habeas corpus, which forbids illegal imprisonment without any evidence of wrongdoing? Check.

Taking away freedoms in the name of security? Check.

"Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one" --Benjamin Franklin

Nothing like some unchecked power, expanded access to third party information, and unconstitutional privileges to show those terrorists!

In the end there is not one reason that the US gov't would try something as stupid as proposed.

But they've staged a false flag attack in order to gain support for something that otherwise would be unpopular among the American people before, so why do you think they wouldn't do it again?

The Gulf of Tonkin incident, the cause for the US entering the US war, was a complete lie. The North Korean ship never fired on us, we fired on them first, and they didn't even fire back, they just sat there are got killed.

Operation Northwoods is eerily similar to 9/11. American citizens being killed in order to gain support for a war. This same concept was about to be used on Americans would be killed and it would be blamed on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion.

reply to post by TupacShakur

Operation Northwoods is eerily similar to 9/11. American citizens being killed in order to gain support for a war. This same concept was about to be used on Americans would be killed and it would be blamed on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion.

One wonders if you ever bother to actually read the documents you post. WHERE does it say American citizens would be killed? It specifically states that deaths would be FAKED.

Originally posted by vipertech0596

WHERE does it say American citizens would be killed? It specifically states that deaths would be FAKED.

That is pretty much irrelevant to the fact that there are similarities. Faked deaths can be easily changed to real deaths. Faked anything could have been changed to real, the overall plan is still the same.

You're just playing the typical semantic game to deflect from the point.

reply to post by ANOK


No, its not semantics. He is using that document to say that American deaths to start a war HAS been done before...and it is an out and out LIE. If you want, when I have a moment, I can start tearing his ravings apart one at a time..........

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by ANOK

No, its not semantics. He is using that document to say that American deaths to start a war HAS been done before...and it is an out and out LIE. If you want, when I have a moment, I can start tearing his ravings apart one at a time..........

Did you forget about the Lucitania too????

Americans were outraged to learn 128 U.S. civilians were killed in a war in which they were officially neutral. Destroying ships not known to be carrying war materials countered generally accepted international war protocols. The sinking of the Lusitania heightened tensions between the U.S. and Germany and helped sway American opinion in favor of joining the war.

history1900s.about.com...

The first clear indication of increased peril to LUSITANIA was the extraordinary notice placed in American newspapers by the German Embassy on 1 May 1915, the day the Cunarder sailed: "Travellers intending to embark on the Atlantic voyage are reminded that a state of war exists between Germany and her allies and Great Britain and her allies; that the zone of war includes the waters adjacent to the British Isles; that, in accordance with formal notice given by the Imperial German Government, vessels flying the flag of Great Britain, or of any of her allies, are liable to destruction in those waters and that travellers sailing in the war zone on ships of Great Britain or her allies do so at their own risk."

www.gwpda.org...

Because Osama was the scapegoat. Osama was blamed to justify the invasion of Afghanistan, and the WMDs were the justification for the invasion of Iraq. If Saddam was blamed for the 9/11 attacks, then we would have only had reason to invade Iraq.

Oh...here's another one.....well, okay its not a COMPLETE lie...but..........

WMDs were never the ONLY reason we went into Iraq, it was just one of them. I refer you to the President's speech before Congress in September 2001. He clearly stated that if you were a nation that harbored, trained or supported terrorists that meant to do harm to the United States, we were going to come knocking. Iraq did all of those things. People on ATS (and around the world) complained for a long time that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. President Bush never once said that the war on terrorism was going to be limited to those responsible for the attacks on 9/11/01.....not once. However, MOST people around here have the memory of a goldfish and do not remember that.

A couple of side notes here....

1. A US Court DID rule that based on available evidence Saddam WAS connected to Al Qaeda and the attacks on 9/11/01.
2. Terrorists wanted for the 1993 Al Qaeda attack on the WTC were found to have been on the roster of Saddam's Fedayeen.
3. An Iraqi national was known to have assisted 9/11 hijackers in their transit throught Kuala Lampur. This man disappeared from his job in Malaysia five days later. Subsequently, he was arrested in Qatar in 2002. This Iraqi, was also found in the employment records for the Iraqi government.
4. The Iraqi Second Secretary at the Iraqi Embassy in the Phillipines was expelled when it was found he had been in contact with Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists just prior to an attack in the Phillipines.
5. To this DAY, intelligence agencies of allies of the United States insist that Mohammed Atta met with Iraqi government officials on several occasions (not just the ONE time that was used to dismiss the claim since Atta was supposedly in Florida on that occasion).

Then my favorite....


6. Abu Nidal, the man who perfected the Airliner Hijacking in the 70s and 80s, lived for many years in Baghdad, Iraq, reportedly working at a terrorist training center. In August 2002....about the time the US started beating the drums about Iraq....Abu Nidal commits "suicide" by shooting himself FOUR TIMES. Dead men tell no tales............

reply to post by ontarff


Im sorry....where does it state that the United States Government planned the sinking of the Lusitania as a way of getting into World War I? Anyone?

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by ontarff

Im sorry....where does it state that the United States Government planned the sinking of the Lusitania as a way of getting into World War I? Anyone?

My response was pointed to your statement

...American deaths to start a war HAS been done before...and it is an out and out LIE.

It had nothing to do with U.S. government conspiracy. It is arguable that this incident by itself provoked the U.S. to go to war against Germany.

One of the reasons that there is a conspiracy theory regarding the Lusitania's sinking is that she was unescorted. This is seen as neglect on the part of the British Admiralty. In practise it was difficult for escorts to meet up with the liners in the open seas. They could not signal a meeting point without giving away their position, or the position of the liner. On March 6, 1915 the Lusitania avoided and then outran two escort ships on her way into port, not knowing if they were enemy ships or friendly one.

hovalis.hubpages.com...

reply to post by ontarff


Try and follow the discussion. Which was the idea that the US government actively planned the death of US citizens as a way to start a war.

reply to post by vipertech0596


Add to that NORTHWOODS was never put into operation. When JFK heard about it said that it was ^&*(
nuts and killed it

The author of the plane Gen Lyman Lemnitzer was denied another term as Chairman JCS and packed off
to Nato Headquarters in Europe

Kennedy personally rejected the Northwoods proposal, and it would now be the Joint Chiefs' turn to incur his displeasure. A JCS/Pentagon document (Ed Lansdale memo) dated 16 March 1962 titled MEETING WITH THE PRESIDENT, 16 MARCH 1962 reads: "General Lemnitzer commented that the military had contingency plans for US intervention. Also it had plans for creating plausible pretexts to use force, with the pretext either attacks on US aircraft or a Cuban action in Latin America for which we could retaliate. The President said bluntly that we were not discussing the use of military force, that General Lemnitzer might find the U.S so engaged in Berlin or elsewhere that he couldn't use the contemplated 4 divisions in Cuba." The proposal was sent for approval to the Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara, but was not implemented.

Lemnitzer approved the plans known as Operation Northwoods in 1962, a proposed plan to discredit the Castro regime and create support for military action against Cuba by staging false flag genuine acts of terrorism and developing "a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington". Lemnitzer presented the plans to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara on March 13, 1962. It is unclear how McNamara reacted, but three days later President Kennedy told the general that there was no chance that America would take military action against Cuba. Within a few months, after the denial of Operation Northwoods, Lemnitzer was denied another term as JCS chairman.[

reply to post by vipertech0596

One wonders if you ever bother to actually read the documents you post. WHERE does it say American citizens would be killed? It specifically states that deaths would be FAKED.

Right here:

sink[ing] a boatload of Cuban refugees [color=limegreen](real or simulated)

concocting a “Remember the Maine” incident by blowing up a U.S. ship in Cuban waters and then blaming the incident on Cuban sabotage

You're the one who should read what's posted big guy.

reply to post by vipertech0596

WMDs were never the ONLY reason we went into Iraq, it was just one of them. I refer you to the President's speech before Congress in September 2001.

I know all about the other reasons, in fact I just made a thread over that exact topic a few hours ago in which I go through Bush's speech that he gave announcing the invasion of Iraq, and compare his carefully worded statements against reality: The Unpatriotic Invasion of Iraq

reply to post by thedman

Add to that NORTHWOODS was never put into operation. When JFK heard about it said that it was ^&*(
nuts and killed it

That's not the point, members of our government planned a false flag attack in which they would kill American citizens and blame it on Cuba to incite a war. That is a huge deal! Just because it didn't happen doesn't mean anything, they planned it!

That's like planning a brutal killing spree with some co-workers, and then having your boss find out and say "Absolutely not", then defending the would-be murderers by saying "Well they never went on the killing spree because the boss found out and pulled the plug".

reply to post by TupacShakur


Well that is okay, because jet fuel isn't used in blast furnaces anyway.

If stating that there was no jet fuel is the only answer you can give to my question and my post then I think I may have gotten my point across to you.

We don't burn magical items in blast furnaces to melt steel. Pretty much any flamable material will do as long as you can create enough wind to provide enough oxygen to the fire.

Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by thedman

 

Add to that NORTHWOODS was never put into operation. When JFK heard about it said that it was ^&*(
nuts and killed it

That's not the point, members of our government planned a false flag attack in which they would kill American citizens and blame it on Cuba to incite a war. That is a huge deal! Just because it didn't happen doesn't mean anything, they planned it!

That's like planning a brutal killing spree with some co-workers, and then having your boss find out and say "Absolutely not", then defending the would-be murderers by saying "Well they never went on the killing spree because the boss found out and pulled the plug".

My response to that, is, so what?

The US has many plans that were thought up, including invasions of Canada, Mexico, Greenland, any of the islands in the Caribbean, war with Britain, France, Norway, to name but a few. So if say, something serious happens and we need to invade Canada, are you also going to squawk about how it was planned and false flagged, because they thought of something similar years ago?

Oh and one important fact about Northwoods: No US citizens or any one else was suppose to get killed in Operation Northwoods. It was all suppose to be faked, with actual aircraft, ships, and equipment. Also, they were meant to be done just far enough for regular folks to see what happened, but not close enough to see the "fake" part. They were not suppose to do right under the noses of hundreds of thousands of people that could have seen everything, including planting evidence, faking a crash without the use of an actual plane in the middle of the most busiest center in DC and NY. They were to use "friendly" Cubans to fake attacks. Notice: FAKE attacks. Conduct FAKE funerals and memorials. Blow up drone aircraft. Blow up fake planes. All using CUBANS, in order to give a pretense to attack CUBA. No one was suppose to get killed. No one. Don't tell me they would shelve a plan that doesnt cause any actual victims, then take it out and then murder over 3000 people using the same plan. But what gets me is that, instead of using Afghans or Iraqis, as the hijackers, they were nearly all Saudi. What the hell kind of a plan is that? That would have been like Operation Northwoods using Canadians to stage the fake attacks, then invade Cuba. How would that work? The hijackers were Saudi, so we are going to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. Yeah right. Think people, think!

reply to post by GenRadek

My response to that, is, so what?

The US has many plans that were thought up, including invasions of Canada, Mexico, Greenland, any of the islands in the Caribbean, war with Britain, France, Norway, to name but a few. So if say, something serious happens and we need to invade Canada, are you also going to squawk about how it was planned and false flagged, because they thought of something similar years ago?

Dude you don't seem to understand the severity of Operation Northwoods. We planned to kill our own citizens and stage attacks that Cubans committed in order to justify a war. How is that not a big deal? How can you be so apathetic about our own government planning something so sinister and evil against Americans?

Oh and one important fact about Northwoods: No US citizens or any one else was suppose to get killed in Operation Northwoods. It was all suppose to be faked, with actual aircraft, ships, and equipment. Also, they were meant to be done just far enough for regular folks to see what happened, but not close enough to see the "fake" part. They were not suppose to do right under the noses of hundreds of thousands of people that could have seen everything, including planting evidence, faking a crash without the use of an actual plane in the middle of the most busiest center in DC and NY. They were to use "friendly" Cubans to fake attacks. Notice: FAKE attacks. Conduct FAKE funerals and memorials. Blow up drone aircraft. Blow up fake planes. All using CUBANS, in order to give a pretense to attack CUBA. No one was suppose to get killed. No one. Don't tell me they would shelve a plan that doesnt cause any actual victims, then take it out and then murder over 3000 people using the same plan. But what gets me is that, instead of using Afghans or Iraqis, as the hijackers, they were nearly all Saudi. What the hell kind of a plan is that? That would have been like Operation Northwoods using Canadians to stage the fake attacks, then invade Cuba. How would that work? The hijackers were Saudi, so we are going to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. Yeah right. Think people, think!

Yes, you sure said the word fake about 50 times, but you must have missed this:

sink[ing] a boatload of Cuban refugees [color=limegreen](real or simulated)

concocting a “Remember the Maine” incident by blowing up a U.S. ship in Cuban waters and then blaming the incident on Cuban sabotage

But forget about that, let's say everything would be faked. Even the attack of the US ship would be faked, it would be remote controlled and nobody would be aboard during the attack.

With everything being faked, not a single American citizen would be killed or even injured. But our government still would have faked an attack in order to start a war, and you don't see that as messed up? Millions if not billions of taxpayer dollars spent unjustifiably killing Cubans is chill? You think since nobody got killed, it's OK that the government lies to the public, and fabricates reality in order to gain support for a war? Americans might not have died during the false flag attack, but they would have died in the war that follows the lie that our government would have perpetrated.

I can't believe you dude.....you're the one who should "think!"

And it doesn't matter that the majority of the hi-jackers were from Saudi Arabia, because Osama was the scapegoat and since he was supposedly the head-goon who planned the attack we invaded Afghanistan to get payback.

reply to post by TupacShakur


And again, where does it say American citizens would be killed?? You still haven't found that part. Oh, wait, it wasn't there.

reply to post by TupacShakur


And again, with this lie...

members of our government planned a false flag attack in which they would kill American citizens and blame it on Cuba to incite a war

I will call you on it every time I see you repeat this lie.

vipertech0596:

Seriously... war doesn't cause death? On both sides?

Must've been working on your posts while the previous one came in.

reply to post by IrishWristwatch


You are new, I will give you the benefit of the doubt.

I am well aware of what war does to people, I've spent all of my adult life either in war zones, training for war, or dealing with the after effects of war.

What I am referring to is the moronic statements that the US Government has ever planned to kill American citizens as a ruse in order to enter a war.