Really? Where do you hear that? On the contrary, I think you'll find a lot of Americans find our justice system completely fucked.
For the lazy people who don't want to answer the above: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_Shah_Massoud You're welcome. Excerpt:
Thanks for consulting the Oracle [Wikipedia] . I heard of a concept drafted by the top US Govt brass in the 1990's called the "Project for The New American Century", it described the steps necessary to make the US the dominant superpower in the world. They practically stated that the process would be long and tedious without a catalytic event such as a "New Pearl Harbor". I would like someone to run it through a search engine.
So? You can argue that they took advantage of it politically but it doesn't really do anything to prove a conspiracy theory. And personally I'll take sourced info from Wikipedia over someone who just keeps making unsubstantiated claims over and over.
Read this report in its entirety. http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842 Then read it again. Then come back and tell be that 9/11 may have been a conspiracy
I sure would like someone to actually read the Massoud article and then come back trying to argue the 'America gave Osama money in the 80's' shit. Frankly, I'm pretty sure a lot of you think the Soviet invasion was "Russia vs. The Taliban".
No it's more like 'America gave the Vietcong money and supplied military weapons in the 70s' shit. Which is completely non-article like but having said that to what CallofReach said, it's sounding more and more like Vietnam. And quite frankly, I think you're playing a bad card when you bring the Soviet invasion into the context.
Nobody here is questioning whether the attacks really happened the way they did, and that's pretty much what that report is about.
I don't like using the term 'conspiracy theory' when these issues are raised, but I urge everyone to keep an open mind. It's foolish to think the authorities don't keep things from the general public even if it is for what their idea of the greater good is. I tend to agree with alot the scepticism surrounding 9/11, and this whole Bin Laden death suddenly coming out of the blue with no one seemingly able to keep their stories straight only cries out that something's not as it seems. Either way, it's imperitive in cases like these to keep an open mind.
Keeping an open mind is completely different to believing in something that defies all logic. As soon as I see a good reason I'll take it into account.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/13/bin-laden-kill-plan_n_861480.html This is a very good article that describes how Obama was basically acting on a still classified covert order from over 9 years ago that Bush put into place that authorized the CIA to use all methods at their disposal to wipe out Al-Queda, explicitly including deadly force. Presidential covert orders never expire unless the following presidents sign a new order suspending or revoking them. Seeing as Obama did neither, he was working on the legal authority of what Bush had authorized 9-10 years ago. And for the record, it wasn't even him who coordinated the attack. It was the CIA. He pretty much just authorized the mission to happen and the let the CIA handle it. Oh and there's also this: Criticize Obama all you want for not giving Osama a "fair trial", but I doubt Bush would've given a fuck about civilian casualties, or given Osama a burial at sea. Obama has more couth in his pinky fingers then Bush had in his entire body.
The hell are you talking about? it would help if you followed up these kind of posts with anything other than "No, you don't know what you're talking about", I can't tell if you're just making a terrible analogy or you seriously think that's how Vietnam happened.
Yeah, for once I'm going to have to side here with Blackee. That is most definitely NOT how Vietnam happened, and it's disrespectful to the people who served in that war. The media painted them as "baby-killers" etc, when in reality a lot of the soldiers who served in that war were honorable and committed no such atrocities. The media massacred the people who served in that war when they came back home, destroyed their lives and even today (as shown by your horribly incorrect statement) those who served are still not given total respect. Vietnam was a mistake of a war, but a lot of the information spread around about it is untrue.
Exactly. It's not that I'm unwilling to believe that Osama Bin Laden is alive or that 9/11 was an inside job, I just haven't seen any truly compelling evidence to support either of those claims. So, yes, people absolutely should be skeptical of everything their government tells them, but they should apply the same skepticism to every other source. EDIT: The parallels between the Vietnam War and America's involvement in the middle east are uncanny, but I'll be damned if I know what the hell she's talking about or how it applies to the current discussion.
I'll definitely agree with that statement. Everything I've said is based on declassified US Govt documents, I haven't made any claims whatsoever apart from my belief that 9/11 was no one man show. It does not defy logic for WTC 7 to have been pulled, for me at least. This just doesn't make sense. Agree, that's what I thought while watching Alex Jones and some other frauds.
That's another one until you show proof that that's where it's all coming from. I gave you two pages about how it does... one was a whole site in fact. I can give you more if you like.