After reading this today, I figure it would be a really smart idea for the elites to stage an assassination of Obama in either Afghanistan or another middle east area. This would be an easy way to get just about everybody united behind a war on the entire world (starting with Iran), while also slipping the ol' Hill-dawg in. Two birds with one stone. Just a scenario. Hi btw.
NCZ, great post. If the elite wanted another big war than yes i would make perfect sense to stage it as an excuse to attack iran, but i dont know if the elite can handle another war right now. Very very fascinating thought though and not out of the realm of what they have done in the past.
Who is the "elite" that you think has the power to shoot anyone and start a war on behalf of the United States?
Thanks man! Well I can't name names but probably the same people that orchestrated 9/11. Same ones who told FDR to zip it before Pearl Harbor.
It's a subjective theory that people like to use as some sort of "proof" in debates, what do you think of it?
I think all things being equal, I will stick with the notion that Bin Laden and Al Queda committed 9-11. There are just too many assumptions that must be made for any other theory to work. Occam's razor is the logic behind that conclusion.
The Bin-Laden family's ties to the Bush family freaks me out a bit. I can conceive of a few officials being given information about the attack beforehand and looking the other way for political reasons, but I do think OBL helped mastermind it. The trick is the same with everything else surrounding this War on Terror, so many lies have been exposed it is really difficult to believe anything at all. The most logical conclusion for me is simply that I am probably being lied to by my government either way.
I'm not a philosophy guy so I'll do a big ol' "what he said" on earth's response. For me, there's too many reasons not to believe it was a fraud. What lead me to start questioning my government was how long it takes them to get things done, with the war, with the border, when we know damn well that if they wanted they could get things done much much faster. I'm also very curious like curious george, and often you won't find me stating facts, but rather asking questions. So a lot of what I believe isn't based off of solid facts, but I will not believe in those unanswerable questions. What's ironic is, you bring up the bogey man, but who is Osama to you, isn't he the bogey man?
Not just that Nate but also, the fact that us private citizens have to literally beg for information 10 to 30 years after the fact with the freedom of information act and the papers we do get back are 75% or more blanked out with dark ink. Doesnt that seem a bit suspicious to you guys?
No, he is just a simple man who decided to pursue a religious battle against his enemies. He had the money to start a group to pursue his religious beliefs though violence. He is not some evil genius who is behind everything. He got lucky and successfully attacked the US. We got caught off guard as a nation. As for questioning things including your government, I have no problem, and would encourage it from everyone. I am certainly no sycophant for the government, but nor will I accept theories based on nothing more than a couple unexplained questions or odd circumstances. Those are a part of life. It would be silly to expect the government to precisely recreate the incident in a way that explains everything. If you have ever watched even a simple trial about a car accident with just a handful of witnesses you will get widely varying stories. The idea that a whole city of people is going to tell the same story is absurd on its face. People who use those discrepancies and spin them into some sinister conspiracy are forced to make so many assumptions - when far fewer and more reasonable assumptions can explain the accepted truth. I don't have a problem when people have questions or don't know exactly how or why something happened. I am bothered when they are willing to just accept that it was the US behind it when there is scant evidence to support it and overwhelming evidence to the contrary. No. There are many reasons to keep state secrets. Don't you agree? For example, do you think you should be allowed to know what undercover agents the US might have in foreign governments or in terrorist groups? Do you think you have a right to know the details of how the US plans to deal with various types of attacks. Wouldn't you agree that there is certain information that should be kept secret. I am sure there is much kept secret that should not be or is not necessary. But, I do not accept that there is nothing that should be kept secret. That would be folly.
Uh uh, now wait, a common misconception is that we or I believe the US in particular is responsible. New Zealand is every bit as responsible as the US in that regard. This is much bigger than just blaming America. I'm not holding the people responsible, nor the primary government. It's the people behind the curtain I'm holding responsible who are able to tap into sections of any government they want, because they have the money and power to do so. Also, some of the reasons I don't believe the main story have more to do with common sense than biased 'personal accounts'. Not only the fact that the floors fell at free fall speed, but the fact that a plane was even able to steer at that altitude and hit it's target by get this, a rookie pilot. If there was overwhelming evidence in support of the main story, I think they would've released the surveillance footage of what hit the Pentagon also.
Not at all. You should probably assume I disagree with all your posts on this forum. I do however think your name fits and wanted to take the free shot.
The US Secret Service is a professional organization is will protect Obama do the best of their ability.
No country can fight against the entire world, neither is it a good idea. Neither is there anything much to be gained from assassinating obama. Sometimes ..... conspiracy theorists make government and the "elites" look much more smarter and more powerful than they actually are.