This has already been hashed over, if you'll bother to do the research. There's nothing I or anybody else can say that will excuse you from doing your own research -- dare I say your own thinking.
I wouldn't be so naive to think that every member of the government and media were briefed on intel of that kind.. But I would be bold enough to say that most all "media" (tv, magazine, newspaper etc) worldwide is owned by 3 corporations and most all corporations have agendas while the news they report and how they report it are all for sale.. And we know the FED backed governments have plenty of "truth" buying power. And in government, they have levels of classification and security, only the upper ranks of State can even have access to. I would think that they have ways of keeping secrets, the best they can anyway.
Oh most definitely!! I was just using that as a glaring example, since most actually believe the FED and IRS are the government when in fact, they are quite the opposite! I do know what you're saying about 9/11, I have a friend that gets irate and in your face when he hears people talking and assuming it was a "foreign" act of terror. Too many things are just too coincidental for me to believe it's at all what was told to the 'people'.. I'm just not sure how deep and far the rabbit hole goes, although I most certainly do realize the depth of which this can go and it's downright frightening.
The 'State" is a slave to the FED. The only true puppets are P'sOTUS as they are put in place by the FED, any candidate that wins the POTUS election must be willing to play ball with the FED... Or they will not be elected. Hell, look at Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, the 2 candidates that want to audit and dissolve the FED, sure is funny how they are forever left out of the spotlight.. Money 'talks' and the banking cartels that make up the FED and its cronies have plenty to 'say'.
I'm rather an odd duck as a Truther. While I recognized that the freefall speed at which the Twin Towers came down was due to controlled demolition by explosives planted in the towers weeks before their detonation on 9/11, I recognized also that the tipping of the South Tower (also known as World Trade Two) immediately above the plane strike point was due to failure caused by both structural integrity loss beneath a great amout of floors (and therefore of mass) and intense heat.
I believe a scientific approach is best, as opposed to a sectarian one.
You folks are funny. You revile the State and its current puppet, but believe in the State's fairy tale of 9/11-as-foreign-attack (upon which your worldview is built) as surely as your two-year-old believes in Santa Claus.
Unfortunately I wasn't thinking in terms of "real world" more this shared utopic experience. If all parties had acted rationally it never would have happened. That is what I meant was sad
Legions probably wish I, myself, and me -- had never been thought of, let alone actually born . (In other words, I like your "No offense" sentence, especially)
No offense, but that's the same as saying if the Ambassador had never been born it wouldn't have happened. I agree that people should always be respectful of others, but in the real world, it's just not like that. People should use rational thinking when confronted by things they don't agree with, not violence and rage, it's simply ignorant, uncivilized and barbaric. When Larry David urinated all over a portrait of Jesus while on stage performing stand-up, I don't recall Christians taking to the streets and attacking all things Jewish worldwide and killing anyone etc. Common sense and civility with compassion for humanity and empathy, these things are absent from certain individuals and groups.
I agree, (b)... It's the same principle as paying ransoms, if it's done once, then it becomes big business for criminal enterprises as they will most definitely be expecting it again and again . It is in my opinion that if we 'change' anything, especially something as fundamental as amending our rights and our Constitution because of terrorist/extremist activity, they will see it as a victory and strive for more and more said victories all the while pushing the envelop for the 'acts' to be bigger and more bold as time progresses. Similar to when any criminal commits a crime and 'gets away with it', the criminal sees it as 'winning' and therefore the activity becomes rewarding, even giving a sense of euphoric pleasure which, in turn, can literally become an 'addictive' behavior. It's a perfect example of the proverbial 'slippery slope', it's in fact the epitome of. Unfortunately, I see it being worse, it's more of a drop-off, like the face of a cliff.
Hello Catie, I don’t have a problem with anyone expressing their beliefs and exercising their 1st amendment rights. I do have a problem with “someone invading your property”. If I can walk away from someone whether they are espousing mysticism or bad philosophy it makes no difference to me; So long as I can, if I desire, speak out against it or move on, it is of little concern. There is a problem with people who sit idly/ silently by while people of differing beliefs are tortured, killed, and their institutions burned, then express outrage, riot, destroy property, kill in the name of their “peaceful religion” blame an entire nation over a perceived slight/ insult by one insensitive film maker, cartoonist or writer… There is no equivalency between words and violent actions. Regards, O.A.
So how do you guys feel about missionaries? Someone invading your property, telling you, you have chosen the "wrong" religion and should choose their " right" religion?
Eugene Volokh comment, at PJMedia, address above (see article): "Say that the murders in Libya lead us to pass a law banning some kinds of speech that Muslims find offensive or blasphemous, or re"interpreting" our First Amendment rules to make it possible to punish such speech under some existing law. What then will extremist Muslims see? They killed several Americans (maybe itself a plus from their view). IN EXCHANGE, they’ve gotten America to submit to their will. And on top of that, they’ve gotten back at blasphemers, and deter future blasphemy. A triple victory. Would this (a) satisfy them that now America is trying to prevent blasphemy, so there’s no reason to kill over the next offensive incident, or (b) make them want more such victories? My money would be on (b)."
Previous comments... You are currently on page 2.
I do know what you're saying about 9/11, I have a friend that gets irate and in your face when he hears people talking and assuming it was a "foreign" act of terror. Too many things are just too coincidental for me to believe it's at all what was told to the 'people'.. I'm just not sure how deep and far the rabbit hole goes, although I most certainly do realize the depth of which this can go and it's downright frightening.
Money 'talks' and the banking cartels that make up the FED and its cronies have plenty to 'say'.
I believe a scientific approach is best, as opposed to a sectarian one.
(In other words, I like your "No offense" sentence, especially)
I agree that people should always be respectful of others, but in the real world, it's just not like that. People should use rational thinking when confronted by things they don't agree with, not violence and rage, it's simply ignorant, uncivilized and barbaric.
When Larry David urinated all over a portrait of Jesus while on stage performing stand-up, I don't recall Christians taking to the streets and attacking all things Jewish worldwide and killing anyone etc.
Common sense and civility with compassion for humanity and empathy, these things are absent from certain individuals and groups.
I don’t have a problem with anyone expressing their beliefs and exercising their 1st amendment rights. I do have a problem with “someone invading your property”. If I can walk away from someone whether they are espousing mysticism or bad philosophy it makes no difference to me; So long as I can, if I desire, speak out against it or move on, it is of little concern.
There is a problem with people who sit idly/ silently by while people of differing beliefs are tortured, killed, and their institutions burned, then express outrage, riot, destroy property, kill in the name of their “peaceful religion” blame an entire nation over a perceived slight/ insult by one insensitive film maker, cartoonist or writer… There is no equivalency between words and violent actions.
Regards,
O.A.
http://www.volokh.com/2012/09/15/why-pun...
"Say that the murders in Libya lead us to pass a law banning some kinds of speech that Muslims find offensive or blasphemous, or re"interpreting" our First Amendment rules to make it possible to punish such speech under some existing law.
What then will extremist Muslims see? They killed several Americans (maybe itself a plus from their view).
IN EXCHANGE, they’ve gotten America to submit to their will.
And on top of that, they’ve gotten back at blasphemers, and deter future blasphemy. A triple victory.
Would this
(a) satisfy them that now America is trying to prevent blasphemy, so there’s no reason to kill over the next offensive incident, or
(b) make them want more such victories?
My money would be on (b)."
DICTATORSHIP
The USSA has become both .
(United Socialist States of America)
Load more comments...