The Obama Deception (5 Viewers)

[Bjerknes]

Governments never stage terror attacks.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[.zero]

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the President of the United States, Barry George Bush-Soetoro.

That is an eerie pic right there

 

[Salvo]

true it is, what are your views on 9/11?

for me it was a controlled demolition, cia job an excuse to go into iraq for oil.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Of course you think that, because you are an idiot.

Why would we have ever needed a reason to go into Iraq?

We went into Afghanistan years prior to Iraq...

 

[Salvo]

idiot is harsh, just my theory, it doesnt sound right IMO.
look im not 100% sure on the facts but does it not seem a tad dodgy?

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Well, it would be like cutting off your leg because your toe hurts.

THe ends would not justify the means.

Why blow up a lot of innocent American civilians to go to Iraq? We are the greatest military power the world has ever known, we could do whatever we wanted.

Also, if Iraq is the final step, the place we truly want to occupy, then why even go to Afghanistan, for public support? I could buy that, but we still have troops in Afghanistan, almost 8 years after we knew it was Saudis that committed the crimes.

 

[king Ale]

true it is, what are your views on 9/11?

for me it was a controlled demolition, cia job an excuse to go into iraq for oil.

Wow. As if they were desperate to have an excuse.

I can't believe how much some folks here can be delusional and credulous.

 

[Fred]

I don't think it was a controlled demolition, too much things could go wrong and it would have been too stupid a move.

I do think however that the CIA knew about the plans to attack the towers, but didn't do anything about it, instead they thought about how to take advantage of the situation.

 

[king Ale]

You are delusional and credulous.

 

[Eddy]

Politics is delusional and credulous Hoori.

 

[Bisco]

You are delusional and credulous.

why not hoori, what makes u shoot down the idea that this might've been an inside job.

do u think these attacks where orchestrated by guys who live in caves hoori? there a few good reasons to suggest other wise regarding the collapsing of the twin towers.

as burke mentioned the Us did'nt really need the 9/11 for there invasion of iraq, bec they did take there case to the united nations when it came to iraq ( even though they did'nt wait for the un's response to there case and went ahead with there attacks in march 2003). with afghanstan they went straight ahead a month after the attacks of 9/11.

i do believe 9/11 did the job of getting public support behind both wars and terrorism or global terrorism was used as an excuse to envade any country with out the need for un backing of such military efforts. kind of the same effect pearl harbour had ( with major differences between each incidents taken in consideration)

afghanistan-----> ( world public) reason used to justify attacks was getting osama bin laden and bring an end to taliban who sponser terror-----> (reasons after war kicked in)there is also the reason for gas lines that had to pass thru afghanistan for it to reach ports where it can be put on ships.

iraq----------> ( world public) reason used weapons of mass destruction, removing of saddam and bringing in democracy ot iraq----->(reasons that unfolded after the war kicked in) iraq being the second largest producer of oil in the world behind saudi arabia and ahead of iran.

there for i doubt the US public would back up the real reasons of both wars had it not been for 9/11 and the rising of a better reason ( at least its a reason that would make parents sending there sons/and daughters to war a bit easier and justified) instead of using lets go to iraq to be near oil fields, or lets go to afghanstan for gas lines.

i have a question that's been on my mind for a while now, if enough evidence/facts/historical backing is used does'nt that make things more on the lines of fact rather than being a conspiracy theory??

 

[Lawnchair Bes]

because you'd need to many people to carry out the conspiracy and inevitably one of them would talk

 

[Bisco]

because you'd need to many people to carry out the conspiracy and inevitably one of them would talk

if i did get what u meant exactly, u r saying that when the US government ( theoretically speaking) for example releases information and evidence to back up the claims of people who claim that 9/11 is an inside job then the conspiracy theory label falls off and its a fact just like any historical or scientific fact. is that what u meant bes?

 

[Lawnchair Bes]

i mean, there have been attempts to cover up much lesser conspiracies and that cover up has been unsuccessful, because someone is bound to say something

 

[mikhail]

true it is, what are your views on 9/11?

for me it was a controlled demolition, cia job an excuse to go into iraq for oil.

 

[Bjerknes]

Operation Northwoods, or Northwoods, was a false-flag plan that originated within the United States government in 1962. The plan called for Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) or other operatives to commit genuine acts of terrorism in U.S. cities and elsewhere.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods



To provoke war, Cheney considered dressing up Navy Seals as Iranians and attacking US Navy vessels in the Strait of Hormuz.

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/07/31/cheney-proposal-for-iran-war/



The Gulf of Tonkin Incident was staged to escalate the war in Vietnam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_Incident


_______________

But governments never stage terror attacks and you're an idiot for questioning it.

 

[Bozi]

i mean, there have been attempts to cover up much lesser conspiracies and that cover up has been unsuccessful, because someone is bound to say something

surely there are some big businesses who's spreadsheets post-9/11 could say more than any words ever could

 

[Bjerknes]

Trillions and trillions are to be made in crisis. From the military industrial complex and security services, to the big banks, it's all connected. We need wars, we need disasters, we need suffering to make money.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Sharjah Driving Institute?

Thats where i got my license, what do they have to do with Star Wars?



But you couldn't find Ben Laden

At least he could spell it correctly.

Trillions and trillions are to be made in crisis. From the military industrial complex and security services, to the big banks, it's all connected. We need wars, we need disasters, we need suffering to make money.

Proxy Wars and the War Economy.

 

[Dominic]

why not hoori, what makes u shoot down the idea that this might've been an inside job.

do u think these attacks where orchestrated by guys who live in caves hoori? there a few good reasons to suggest other wise regarding the collapsing of the twin towers.

as burke mentioned the Us did'nt really need the 9/11 for there invasion of iraq, bec they did take there case to the united nations when it came to iraq ( even though they did'nt wait for the un's response to there case and went ahead with there attacks in march 2003). with afghanstan they went straight ahead a month after the attacks of 9/11.

i do believe 9/11 did the job of getting public support behind both wars and terrorism or global terrorism was used as an excuse to envade any country with out the need for un backing of such military efforts. kind of the same effect pearl harbour had ( with major differences between each incidents taken in consideration)

afghanistan-----> ( world public) reason used to justify attacks was getting osama bin laden and bring an end to taliban who sponser terror-----> (reasons after war kicked in)there is also the reason for gas lines that had to pass thru afghanistan for it to reach ports where it can be put on ships.

iraq----------> ( world public) reason used weapons of mass destruction, removing of saddam and bringing in democracy ot iraq----->(reasons that unfolded after the war kicked in) iraq being the second largest producer of oil in the world behind saudi arabia and ahead of iran.

there for i doubt the US public would back up the real reasons of both wars had it not been for 9/11 and the rising of a better reason ( at least its a reason that would make parents sending there sons/and daughters to war a bit easier and justified) instead of using lets go to iraq to be near oil fields, or lets go to afghanstan for gas lines.

i have a question that's been on my mind for a while now, if enough evidence/facts/historical backing is used does'nt that make things more on the lines of fact rather than being a conspiracy theory??