JFK to 911
Forums › General Discussion › JFK to 911-
@ Deicide. I appreciate your honesty it's refreshing other people (Brown) just come out with excuse after excuse to why we should be in the Middle East . "To save them from a dictator" he says lmao. "To make there lives better" lmao but inside he knows that's total bollocks just look at the state of the place now! Does that look like a place we have made better.? He admits we lied about WMD yet we wouldn't lie about 9/11? Why.
But my question , the German people turning there back on the Jews . People they had been living with for years. Turning there back on them not speaking out because it didn't effect them.
Do you think that was right
-
Sensitive much?
You are in fact completely misinformed once again. Why do you profess to know things about me that you clearly do not?
Does it have anything to do with your propensity to assume as fact things you can't confirm to be true? ..Such as 9/11 being an inside job?
Hmmmm, I see a pattern here.
-
Mr,Shush wrote:
Lieing about going to war is completely different from lieing about killing 3,000 Americans.@ Deicide. I appreciate your honesty it's refreshing other people (Brown) just come out with excuse after excuse to why we should be in the Middle East . "To save them from a dictator" he says lmao. "To make there lives better" lmao but inside he knows that's total bollocks just look at the state of the place now! Does that look like a place we have made better.? He admits we lied about WMD yet we wouldn't lie about 9/11? Why.
But my question , the German people turning there back on the Jews . People they had been living with for years. Turning there back on them not speaking out because it didn't effect them.
Do you think that was right
-
Mr,Shush wrote:
@ Deicide.
But my question , the German people turning there back on the Jews . People they had been living with for years. Turning there back on them not speaking out because it didn't effect them.
Do you think that was right
was it really because it didn't effect them or because they were scared of what might happen to them? maybe losing friends or family or their even their jobs. it might have been more complicated than just not caring. if i feared for my familys safety and well being then i can see me not standing up even for a close friend or distant family member. my wife and kids come first, and no matter how much i don't like something happening to you, i'm not going to sacrifice my familys safety. by intefering you can put your family in harms way.
-
it's like driving by and seeing a group of thugs beat on a single person and deciding to stop and interfere because you know it's not right. that's fine, alot of people will think that's right , they aren't going to stand by and let something like that happen in front of them. good for them. no you put yourself in harms way, risk leaving your kids without a parent for someone else? and god forbid your family is in the car with you, now you put their lives in danger just because you wanted to stop another person from dying without knowing anything about the situation. i would do nothing and just drive by. maybe after a safe distance and out of sight call the police, but that's only if they never noticed my vehicle and no chance of them hunting me down for making the call. besides, the person getting beat to death could possibly deserve it or might just be their time to die.
-
but with the germans, it was so public they could have risked being shunned publicly and making it impossible for them to take care of their familys. or being labeled as traitors and killed. i openly admit i'm no history buff. i don't know every detail about how things went down. i can't imagine being in germany on either side during that time. looking back on it even in books and movies is a far cry from having to live it. i'm thankful that I wasn't there and have much respect for the ones that lived through it. i've lost friends to a hell of alot less threatening circumstances than that.... so i don't blame them at all. if you are down, or been marked for death like that, be a friend and don't take my family with you.
-
if something is threatening my life it's reasonable and expected that i would seek help. but that help has to be able to match up against the threat. if i'm in real trouble, the last thing i'm going to do is bring that trouble to my family or friends door step. i will leave and take the threat with me to keep them safe. if i die in the process so be it. at least i know i did right by keeping them out of harms way. (i understand this is being said from the safety of my computer desk and never having been put in that situation) a luxury most of us probably have. the other side of the coin is , if its not just me, if it's my family, i'm going to seek help everywhere. period. i will do whatever is necessary to protect them even if it's to put someone else in harms way to do so. if there is a chance of saving my wife and children i will take it. and yes i realize how hypocritical that is. i would just hope to find someone that isn't like me.
-
Deicide. Once again a straight answer which I admire. But we are not at danger to speak up against this bull shit war on terror.
It's one massive excuse to bleed these countries of oil Heroin, what ever we need to make money.If we all stood together and Said "No this is wrong" then we would get places. The problem is the robots like Hawk & Brown who are so blind threw propaganda.
Hawk. Why do 3000 American lives count for more than 1.000000 Iraqi lives ???
-
taking what's not ours, what we want or need by force is a very repetitive theme. nothing new or surprising there. I'm not sure why anyone is shocked. it's a force of will and nature. i'm sure it's not a matter of which lives count more, it's an excuse to take something that's not yours. whether that excuse is created by external or internal means it's still an excuse. I care about human lives a great deal, i believe it's the most precious resource on the planet. but if i were the person with the decision between a million lives or that just one of my children i wouldn't blink or lose sleep. that's why i'm not in those type of roles. i know i'm not the person to make the decisions. i don't care how wrong it is or if it would condemn me to whatever hell there might be.
-
i don't think money is the root of all evil like it was stated earlier. we are. human nature. we take and take and take. never enough and will make up whatever excuses we need to do so. such is our history. there is no perfect system because we are at the root of it. we will always corrupt, twist and turn things and spill however much blood is necessary to get what we want. and it will always be for the "greater good" from someones point of view.
-
Ӈཪ༱عɗ☠ᏩᎧེ͜Ꭷེℵ wrote:
👏👏I provided facts and you continue with your witty rants and no facts.You say the links I provided is the same bs not worth going through.You refuse to educate yourself on updated information. And once again,you provided some bogus websites,one of which has no updates since 2013.You asked,"who should you believe?A bunch of basement-dwelling whack job conspiracy theorists,or actual scientists,engineers,eye-witnesses,and my own life-long insider government experience?" Well if you took the time to read the links I posted,you would see that it does consist of scientists,engineers,and eyewitness accounts. You refuse to accept the facts, so why take it out on others who actually do their research and are open to new facts and evidence?And comparing a house of cards to one of the worlds strongest architectural designs is an insult.
-
The strongest architectural designs are not over 100 stories tall. The strongest designs are underground bunkers. The most vulnerable structures are those that push the limits of human engineering for the sake of grandstanding bravado and greed.
Does that not make sense to you?
Do you feel your ideological slant might be affecting your judgement when it comes to this point?
Perhaps the "experts" you speak of are overrated. My wife is an architect, and employs other architechts. Shall I ask her and her team if structurally compromised buildings can collapse when uncontrolled fires burn for hours? What do you think she would say?
I'm guessing you won't care what that particular expert says.
The truth is, she wouldn't know one way or the other. The damage can't easily be measured, nor can we know how strong the structure would be after the fire. It's a crapshoot, and you should know that. The report by NIST is just an educated guess.
But you are so blinded by the disease you can't hear reason.
-
Still tripping over the comment of no WMD in Iraq. So chemical weapons that had been used to kill tens of thousands don't count as a MWD? Are u saying those werent there? Do you consider that maybe when sadam realized we were actually going to invade, he sent those mobile labs across the border to Syria? You know, that country that just USED chemical wmd?
-
ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ ᎪᎠᎠ ᏦᎷ wrote:
Have you been in a coma for the last few days ??Still tripping over the comment of no WMD in Iraq. So chemical weapons that had been used to kill tens of thousands don't count as a MWD? Are u saying those werent there? Do you consider that maybe when sadam realized we were actually going to invade, he sent those mobile labs across the border to Syria? You know, that country that just USED chemical wmd?
We no there was chemical weapons because we USA GB. Sold them to Iraq . We were talking nukes and no they didn't get moved.
Everybody except your self agrees there was no nukes it was just another LIE.
Keep up silly bollox -
Then why don't you say "nukes" then? WMD includes chemical, biological, and radiological weapons. Radiological weapons include fission/fusion ("nukes") and dirty bombs that spread radio active materials with conventional means.
Saddam's regime had an active nuclear weapons program in underground facilities that he refused to let UN inspectors visit. We know he had access to ALL OTHER categories of WMD, and the "nukes" were on the way, or at least obtainable through outside means.
These are facts.
If you thought we were looking for actual "nukes", you need to re-evaluate your thinking.
Did the Bush administration imply that nukes were a possibility? Yes.
Are you running with scissors screaming "LIE LIE LIE!!!"? Yeah. I guess you misunderstood what the car salesman was telling you. But there's no reason to spend the next decade screaming about it.
-
http://www.amazon.com/The-Bomb-My-Garden-Mastermind/dp/0471741272
I suggest reading this book. It was written by the former head of Iraq's nuclear weapons program. I attended a training seminar on counter-proliferation investigations and he was one of the speakers. He details the tactics Iraq used to acquire the materials to built a nuclear bomb, and how the Iraqi govt hid the program from UN inspectors.
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/9937516/Iraq-war-the-greatest-intelligence-failure-in-living-memory.html
But it's not worth me even trying no more.
You morons are so brainwashed its embarrassing .
Wonder why we didn't invade Israel for WMD ?? Maybe because them guys who run there country also run ours. Just saying.
-
So was case for war against Iraq based on lies or on the failures of several countries intelligence services to get the true facts?
Because it can't be both. If you claim President Bush lied, then he had to know the intelligence was bad. If the intelligence services provided bad intel, and President Bush and his admin used that Intel to make their case, then they didn't lie.
You can't have it both ways Mr. shush. Either Bush lied or he received bad intel. Not both.
Have you considered the possibility that the reason intel services of several countries supposedly got it wrong, could be because the Iraqi government blocked the UN inspectors in order to create an atmosphere of uncertainty. Then in that atmosphere of uncertainty, the Iraqi government used operatives to feed the intel services stories that Iraq possessed WMD and were close to having a nuke?
-
Mr,Shush wrote:
Please don't get back into your Jew menace rants here. We all know you hate Jews from our previous discussions. But let's keep it civil, m'kay?http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/9937516/Iraq-war-the-greatest-intelligence-failure-in-living-memory.html
But it's not worth me even trying no more.
You morons are so brainwashed its embarrassing .
Wonder why we didn't invade Israel for WMD ?? Maybe because them guys who run there country also run ours. Just saying.
-
Brown. My gran is Jewish you absolute tool. I've told you before don't judge people. Zionists that's the people I don't like, most your presidents are zionists and ours. you dont have to be jewish,Google the difference then pretend you already new like you always do.
Ragner. They needed an excuse for the oil. Simple so they made one up.
Saddam didn't want to trade in dollar but as I say I'm beating my head against the wall. Go and pull your stars & stripes up at the bottom of your garden get the kids to salute it you brainwashed mugs.
-
Is it at all possible that after WWII the western nations were supportive of giving Jews a nation of their own? You know, after so many of them had been killed and tortured and enslaved, most people thought justice demanded that England hand Israel over to the "Zionists" (Jews that think Israel is theirs).
After which it became obvious that we'd upset the hornet's nest there in the Middle East. It destabilized (was it ever stable?) and we need and want stability over there so that they will SELL us oil. So we try to balance power and keep the peace over there.
But would it be better for US oil interests if Israel wasn't there? ABSOFRIKKIN-LUTELY. But it's their home, and the world thought it just after the horrors of Nazi Germany.
It's not all lies and shadow puppet control. It's just what it appears to be.
-
Lol you ain't a clue. The zionist were running GB and America way before ww2. Palestine was already mapped out by the zionist s .
Answer this. Why did America back nazi Germany financially ?? You gave them oil. Built there rail road and loaned them billions. Or should I say the rich American zionist families did. Your beloved Bush family for starters. Ford engines in there tanks etc . You supplied the fuel for there planes whilst fighting them haha.
It was all for baron Rothschild Zion . That was the deal -
"AMERICA" did not back Nazi Germany one bit. Of course multinational businesses did attempt to deal with Nazi Germany, until a law was passed early in the war to prevent it.
Your confusion between business, politics, and nations is the very core of your paranoia.
Apple is the most valuable company that ever existed. Just think what they have in the works for the world's military/industrial chess game of war! I hear they are bringing billions into the Chinese government as we speak!
[Cue spooky background music]
Apple is planting secret biometric apps in their devices to control us. Think Android is safe? HA! Google is one of the wealthiest multinational corporations in the world! They are all working together to steal our minds! Dumm dum dummm!
-
Senator Prescott Bush was funding hitler Fact but maybe another thing your in denial about. But don't feel to bad about it his rich mates were playing both sides as well , while the soldiers were being killed. Nothing changed much there then as it.
Everything you say you contradict. One minute Bush went to Iraq to liberate the civilians to protect them from a dictator (deluded) . But for some reason it's ok for Israel to steal Palestine whilst killing there innocent. Oil was the reason for the invasion of Iraq and a way of putting there puppets in charge everybody knows this except you.
Zionist bankers call the shots simple and don't think they give 1 shit about Jews just look how they treat the African Jews.
Give me control of a nations money and I care not who makes its laws. Mayer amschel Rothschild. -
http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/mcfadden.html
-
Mr,Shush wrote:
Mr Shush. It's hard to tell, because your grammar is atrocious, but I think you are attributing a quote to Mayer Amschel Rothschild.Senator Prescott Bush was funding hitler Fact but maybe another thing your in denial about. But don't feel to bad about it his rich mates were playing both sides as well , while the soldiers were being killed. Nothing changed much there then as it.
.
Zionist bankers call the shots simple and don't think they give 1 shit about Jews just look how they treat the African Jews.
Give me control of a nations money and I care not who makes its laws. Mayer amschel Rothschild.If that is the case please cite the date and place he made this quote.
-
✯RagnarLoðbrók✯ wrote:
So was case for war against Iraq based on lies or on the failures of several countries intelligence services to get the true facts?
Because it can't be both. If you claim President Bush lied, then he had to know the intelligence was bad. If the intelligence services provided bad intel, and President Bush and his admin used that Intel to make their case, then they didn't lie.
You can't have it both ways Mr. shush. Either Bush lied or he received bad intel. Not both.
why not? why couldn't they have been told what intel to find or come up with and did so. and it could have been known by bush.
here is the lie... now go prove it.... :) works for me.
-
★DΞICIDΞ★ wrote:
If the intel agencies were told to find intel based on a lie, then the case for war in Iraq was based on a lie.✯RagnarLoðbrók✯ wrote:
You can't have it both ways Mr. shush. Either Bush lied or he received bad intel. Not both.
why not? why couldn't they have been told what intel to find or come up with and did so. and it could have been known by bush.
here is the lie... now go prove it.... :) works for me.
If the intel agencies, and there were several agencies from several countries who came to similar conclusions, got the intel wrong, then the case for war in Iraq was based on bad intel.
It cannot be both. Yet, Mr. shush has advanced both theories.
-
Shush, your theories are speculative paranoia. Not your own, of course. You follow every fringe theory put out there that tries to prove the common conception wrong, whatever it may be. That there is some secret ulterior motive behind everything, that the world is run by secret organizations, that all major happenings in recent human history are deceptions, and that the media is deliberately creating and nurturing these falsehoods... This is your core belief system.
If I told you there was a secret chemical in Big Macs that made people believe they still had free will when in reality, our lives are programmed from start to finish by subliminal television inserts, you'd want to learn more.
Then, because your religion is a tiny minority, you think the rest of us are all sheep following the program. You can't believe how stupid we all are, and YOU with your advanced insight are here to save us all.
Go to school. I did. It helps.
-
i think it's funny how invested in it yall are. both sides take alot of time and energy that i'd rather spend elsewhere. just reading it on this forum is taxing enough, but i can't stop coming back to it. yalls interest in the subject is far more entertaining than the subject itself. i will admit i'm not following the links and trying to make my own judgement call because i don't care and don't think it matters. but i can't help watching the back and forth of both views, it's like a soap opera and i get drawn in.
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC