<embed src="http://media.mtvnservices.com/mgid:cms:item:southparkstudios.com:155583" width="480" height="400" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="window" flashVars="autoPlay=false&dist=www.southparkstudios.com&orig=" allowFullScreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" allownetworking="all" bgcolor="#000000"></embed>
So I'm going to guess that my assumption of guys like BEAT LA and ToyCen (and even Cowboy_Bebop) were indeed too young to fully grasp what had occurred in 2001. Youth has to be the only excuse in not just questioning what did occur, but believing entirely unsubstantiated "facts."
Wikipedia baby!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS3DKm8Qj0k This thread exists?? Just go watch that guy on public access tv and all his conspiracy theories...seriously.
The official story of 9/11 is not true, simply because 25 glaring contradictions exist within it. I suggest everybody reads this book (( 9/11 contradictions )), it does not propose an alternative conspiracy theory, however, it proves that the official story of the events of that fateful day can't be true. http://www.amazon.com/11-Contradictions-Letter-Congress-Press/dp/1566567165 "David Ray Griffin, writing specifically for members of Congress and the media, has presented the often incredible but true details of 25 major contradictions in the Bush administration's accounts of 9/11. This book, based on careful research but written in a fast-moving, readable style, blows apart the notion that The 9/11 Commission Report presents an accurate account of what happened on September 11. It makes crystal clear the need for a new investigation." -- Bill Christison, former senior CIA official "When the smoke finally cleared from the pile of rubble on September 11, 2001, we were left with a host of burning questions. The 9/11 Commission did not provide the answers, despite their extensive mandate. 9/11 Contradictions is a work that needed to be written. With characteristic clarity and focus, David Ray Griffin masterfully lays out the most critical of these questions. Now the challenge is to finally get real answers." -- Lorie Van Auken, widow of Kenneth Van Auken, killed at WTC 1 on 9/11/01, and member of the Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Commission
I saw the list of 25 contradictions. This was the most documented event in human history, so of course there are contradictions. However, the contradictions do not override the facts of that day. Four planes were hijacked and crashed that day...it really wasn't that complicated of an event. Demolition experts do not agree with the controlled demolition theory. It has been shown over and over what the damage did to the buildings that caused them to fail. At the pentagon there was plenty of plane debris, there was no missile. The only flight that would have been shot down was flight 93 and had it gone much further it may have been brought down.
Nobody tried to "cover up" the Iraq War. Our initial deployment to Iraq was on freaking CNN. That is the worst job at a cover up in the history of government. Wow...if you think that the Iraq War was some big, covered up government secret, you should probably research what a cover up actually entails.
There is a large group of people in Oklahoma, especially, that rejected Social Security numbers (mainly for tax reasons) when they were assigned them. Until this day they do not have a Social and reside in the US.
They covered up the fact that they knew there were no WMD's in Iraq. That was the whole selling point of the war. It was one of the most brilliant cover ups in history..to hoodwink a nation into thinking another country is your #1 enemy, when in fact they posed no threat at all.
I really doubt his assertion of the physical deployment of military force to Iraq was the cover up. The cover up that Mr. Brightside was alluding to (I assume) was sending Colin Powell in front of the UN and blatantly lying to everyone about the WMDs. I don't know if "cover up" was the best way to describe the justification of going to Iraq, but "got away with" makes sense with the above reference.
Couldn't agree more. The information was out there for anyone who was paying attention. Heck, I was yelling about it here, just as I was having intense, emotional arguments during the run-up to the 1972 election, telling everyone I knew that Nixon was a crook. People laughed! edit: I'll add that Bush and Company covered up a hell of a lot, but invading Iraq wasn't one of those things. The reasons, or lack of them, were what was covered up by the administration. edit II: I don't mean to get this into D&D territory, so ignore what I said if it ruffles any feathers.
1. Sometimes the intelligence is just bad. That is how things like the accidental bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade in 1999 happen. You strongly suspect that they knew...but you cannot know for sure. 2. Even if they knew, that is a lie. There was no cover up. A cover up of the falsification would be to plant uranium over there and parade to the world that the U.S. found the nuke making materials that Iraq had. That would be a cover up. Again...I think that your definition of a cover up is different than that of the rest of the world.
Different intelligency agencies around the world were sure there WMD's, even countries that were not on board with an invasion. I didn't agree with the invasion but I don't think they lied about it...they would have planted WMD'S or had some elaborate blueprint that showed Iraq did have them before the invasion. The government can pull off the 9/11 inside job but can't prove WMD'S in Iraq????
This is the problem with conspiracy theorists. They just assume that the government can pull off a massive operation involving thousands of people on our own soil, but also that the government cannot pull off the unbelievably simple (like planting weapons material in Iraq). It would be funny if the theorists were not so serious about it.
would you consider it a cover-up or falsification to want to paint a bunch of u.s. planes to look like u.n. planes so the iraqis would shoot at them?
http://www.democracynow.org/2006/3/7/lawless_world_bush_considered_flying_us It's interesting, like most conspiracies are. Have you read the book? Who are the sources to this info?
check this site out.. http://www.thewebfairy.com/nerdcities/Hufschmid/PentagonPlaneCrash.html they're saying the Pentagon was not hit by a 757... but a missile!
