Debunking the 9/11 *Anti-No-Plane-Theory* Myths
by CB_Brooklyn
From the moment people thought that planes crashed in the World Trade Center, the brainwashing had begun.
The ?official? account of Boeing 767s striking the North and South Towers, at 400+MPH and 500+MPH respectively, became glued in peoples? minds as ?fact? because of the ?tee-vee?. Good ol? tee-vee. We all trust the media.
Even in 1938, when Orson Welles directed a special Halloween radio broadcast of the novel ?War of the Worlds?, millions of Americans believed Martians were invading earth. Everyone trusts the media! (As a side note, I?d like to advertise a new article by Andrew Johnson: ?Mars Anomalies (http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=159&Itemid=59)?)
It should come to no surprise how the media affects peoples? minds and our culture, and the media?s reporting of 9/11 is no exception.
The 9/11 coverup perpetrators had their deceptive propaganda well planned. With their total control over the media they successfully conditioned most into believing their ?19 boxcutter-wielding Muslims? story. People were overwhelmed; their brains saturated with the propaganda.
November 10, 2001 - George W Bush brainwashes the world into thinking the idea of ?inside job? is crazy: ?Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th; malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty.?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/11/20011110-3.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K5M0xtxQVQ
But the propaganda didn?t stop there. The coverup perps, the experts they are, knew some people would see through their ?boxcutter? deception, so they crafted an alternate propaganda? specifically targeting those already suspicious of the ?official? story.
Lenin, the first Communist dictator after the takeover of Russia in 1917, is widely credited with the following quotation, "The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves."
http://www.realnews247.com/fascism_disguised_at_democracy.htm
This alternate propaganda is promoted by government plants within the ?truth movement?, along with its fabricated evidence (such as molten metal (http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=91&Itemid=60)). Of course, the media carefully publicize this ?evidence? as a ?wacky conspiracy theory??
November 14, 2005 - Tucker Carlson brainwashes the world into thinking the idea of an ?inside job? theory is offensive. Steven Jones promotes the ?alternate propaganda?:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10053445
Yet, the coverup perpetrators use ridicule to keep the ?REAL? version hidden?
December 6, 2006 - Steven E Jones brainwashes the 9/11 ?truth movement? into thinking the idea of directed energy weapons and no planes is ?crazy disinfo?: ?Of late, [Jim Fetzer] refers often to his association now with Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds. These two are noted for their no-planes-hit-the-Towers theories and for promoting the notion of ray-beams from space knocking down the Towers.?
http://judicial-inc.biz/Steven_Jones_quits_911.htm
Jones is one of many in and around the ?truth movement? associated with Los Alamos where Directed Energy Weapons are researched. See here to learn how the 9/11 attacks, the 9/11 cover up, and the 9/11 "truth movement" were orchestrated by people associated with directed energy weapons and the media. Jones also suppressed free energy research in ways that mirror his 9/11 coverup:
9/11 Directed Energy Weapon / TV-Fakery Suppression Timeline
By CB_Brooklyn
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=151&Itemid=60
Timeline of Events Involving Steve Jones, Crockett Grabbe and Steve Koonin
By Russ Gerst
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=162&Itemid=60
If no-planes/TV-Fakery were ?crazy disinfo?, why didn?t the media use it to discredit the ?truth movement?? Here?s a video of Dr Morgan Reynolds on FOX News: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reQZT9Hzvt8
Certainly if no-planes/TV-Fakery were ?crazy disinfo?, the media would have invited Dr Reynolds back. Why didn?t they?
On top of that, why didn?t the media report Reynolds? or Wood?s court cases, represented by Attorney Jerry Leaphart?
Dr Morgan Reynolds, suing on behalf of the United States of America and demanding a Trial by Jury, has evidence that the Media broadcasted cartoons of an airplane hitting the South Tower.
http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=federal_case
Docket No. 1:07-cv-04612-GBD
Title: Dr. Morgan Reynolds ex rel. USA vs. Science Applications International Corp. et al.
Venue: United States District Court, Southern District of New York
Judge: George B. Daniels
Dr Judy Wood, suing on behalf of the United States of America and demanding a Trial by Jury, has evidence that Directed Energy Weapons were a causal factor in the destruction of the World Trade Center.
http://drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/Qui_Tam_Wood.html
Docket No. 1:07-cv-03314-GBD
Title: Dr. Judy Wood ex rel. USA vs. Applied Research Associates, Inc. et al.
Venue: United States District Court, Southern District of New York
Judge: George B. Daniels
=================================================
UPDATE!!! While composing this article the author became aware of the following:
New York Times
?For Engineer, a Cloud of Litigation After 9/11?
By Jim Dwyer
February 23, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/23/nyregion/23about.htm
The relevant quote is as follows (emphasis added):
?? one man has sued on behalf of the United States, claiming that Mr. Gilsanz is part of a vast conspiracy to cover up the truth about 9/11, including the ?so-called building failures.? The lawsuit maintains that exotic weaponry actually destroyed the buildings, and that the airplanes were mass psychological trickery.?
Wood and Reynolds have filed two separate lawsuits.
No mention of Wood/Reynolds/Leaphart?s names in the Times article.
=================================================
Let us review?
The media (i.e. MSNBC):
promote the ?official? version as ?the truth?
ridicule the ?alternate? version as the ?offensive wacky conspiracy theory?
shun the ?REAL? version and court cases
Plants in the ?truth movement? (i.e. Steven Jones):
promote the ?alternate? version as ?the truth?
ridicule the ?REAL? version as ?offensive wacky conspiracy theory?
We can now understand why many ?truthers? shy away from no-planes/TV-Fakery. Seems the 9/11 coverup perps tricked the ?truth movement? with a well orchestrated plan of deception! Will these theories really ?damage? the ?truth movement?, or has the movement merely been tricked into thinking so?
Many ?truthers? often wonder why the mainstream media hasn?t broken the ?inside job? story yet. The reason is simple: The 9/11 perps have not been exposed. (Check the ?Suppression Timeline? linked above.)
Only after the real 9/11 perpetrators are widely exposed with the media break!
Will ?truthers? finally start promoting no-planes/TV-Fakery? If the ?truth movement? can?t admit their mistakes, why should the average person? People will simply continue believing what they feel most comfortable with: the ?boxcutter? story. They don?t care about the evidence. Why should they? After all, the ?truth movement? doesn?t. Or do they???
How many ?truthers? have looked at the no-planes/TV-Fakery evidence lately? evidence that anyone can understand?
Below you will find a ton of evidence. Look it through? you maybe surprised!
======================================================
======================================================
Article is continued at the following link. Check it out and learn of the 1999 Washington Post article that details the military's hologram project:
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=163&Itemid=60
Fake or no planes is BS imho.
They just had preknowledge of the attacks (too much evidence they had so) and exploited it. To make sure the buildings would go down, they placed explosives. The planes are real, the hijackers are real (except those still alive).
The rest are lies, propaganda and edited videofootage by the MSmedia.
Why using fake planes anyway? To save lives, money whatever or to control with remote controls from WTC7? makes no sense.
i could agree that it was a "inside job" but at what level i dont know?, altho i do believe that planes did hit the buildings... there were many people in the streets that witnesed this.
Have you any footage of the said "cartoon planes" hitting the bulidings?.
Chad.
yep, look at the original footage (j/k)
this is good though
http://youtube.com/watch?v=cddIgb1nGJ8
Speaking of witness testimony, here is an excellent website with a new theory - that the towers were hit by trains:
Some quotes:
Nicholas Borrillo -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) on 23rd floor of North Tower:
Then we heard a rumble. We heard it and we felt the whole building shake. It was like being on a train, being in an earthquake. A train is more like it, because with the train you hear the rumbling, and it kind of like moved you around in the hall.
Paul Curran -- Fire Patrolman (F.D.N.Y.) North Tower:
I went back and stood right in front of Eight World Trade Center right by the customs house, and the north tower was set right next to it. Not that much time went by, and all of a sudden the ground just started shaking. It felt like a train was running under my feet.
Joseph Fortis -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.) T]he ground started shaking like a train was coming. You looked up, and I guess -- I don't know, it was one that came down first or two? Which one?
Keith Murphy -- (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 47] At the time, I would have said they sounded like bombs, but it was boom boom boom and then the lights all go out. I hear someone say oh, s___, that was just for the lights out. I would say about 3, 4 seconds, all of a sudden this tremendous roar. It sounded like being in a tunnel with the train coming at you.
Timothy Julian -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 118] You know, and I just heard like an explosion and then cracking type of noise, and then it sounded like a freight train, rumbling and picking up speed, and I remember I looked up, and I saw it coming down.
From: http://loosetrains911.blogspot.com/ (http://loosetrains911.blogspot.com/)
I was 3 blocks away when those buildings fell, and I felt the ground shake also.
I sure wish people would stop spreading this insane nonsense though.
tower shakes -> ground shakes, simple energy transmission (and wireless!) ;)
simple.
@ken_nyus
how are your lungs?
Lots of asbestos I've heard
I don't know what exactly happened that day, but I will tell you this:
The official story is nonsense.
Yeah
WTC7, Pentagon tapes confistigated, "dancing Jews".
what proof do we need more?
As long proof isn't being fabricated by people.
Trains, cartoon planes ... keep it real.
Be sure to continue reading the article at the last link I posted.
Learn of the 1999 Washington Post article that details the military's hologram project.
Learn of the NYPD official who said the South Tower strike "looked like an evil magician's trick".
Learn that very few people reported seeing airplanes, and even fewer reported hearing them.
Also, watch the ABC video of Peter Jennings. He knew the airplane video was fake. Note his nervousness and word fumbling when ABC played the clip back in slow motion.
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=163&Itemid=60
It is pretty scary how fucking stupid some people can be, there can't be any sugar coating it, believing the planes are not real is just incredibly dumb, actually insane.
And I suppose the holes in the shape of planes are CGI too, and the smoke coming out of said holes for hours, but what of all the people watching the towers as the second plane hit, not one claims 'I was looking and there was no plane'.
And since the building collapsed starting where the nonexistent planes hit then maybe they didn't collapse?
Has anyone checked them?
IMO while it is scary how fucking stupid some people are, I think the that those supporting it are probably working for some alphabet soup agency to make anyone who believe look, well, fucking stupid.
This is not the forum for 911 stuff but least of all this crap.
Quote
IMO while it is scary how fucking stupid some people are, I think the that those supporting it are probably working for some alphabet soup agency to make anyone who believe look, well, fucking stupid.
I agree. The absurd "no planes" scenarios get tied to the not-so absurd directed energy hypotheses, forming a false association between them. We "kinda crazy" folks who are willing to consider directed energy hypotheses are lumped-in with the "really crazy" no-planers. Whenever I smell an attempt by the spooks to forge such misleading associations, my nostrils flare with the whiff of cover-up. Whether or not directed energy was used at ground zero, a concerted effort has been made to discredit any suggestion of exotic weaponry as being on-par with the "martians did it".
Of course there were planes. Why fake something when the real deal is a lot easier?
As for directed energy? Well, all I can tell you is this: HAARP and Poker Flat were conducting some pretty major ops leading up to the attack. Similar activity recorded at other times coincides with anomalous sonic booms, earthquakes, fireball sightings, and the like.
Consider this: The Twin Towers were in effect a giant pair of steel rabbit-ear antennas grounded to the earth. They no doubt sustained frequent lightning strikes. Lightning can be detected by the ELF waves given off in the discharge. The lightning strikes which hit the towers would ring in the ELF at specific frequencies. Pumping the towers with these recorded frequencies could induce a resonant electromagnetic coupling, effectively dumping the energy from the source into the steel frame of the target building. If the energy source is the auroral electrojet, toasting a skyscraper would be a piece of cake.
It was trains. Choo choo.
I worked in the towers many many times doing testing for the different trades and was shocked that the buildings didn't just fall on impact .nothing but elevator shafts connected to perimeter fascia bye bar joists liteguage deck and light weight concrete wide open one acre floors no beams any where shopping malls are built better Many of my contracters watched the second plane from jobsites all over down town and rite accross the river in New Jersey Chet
In the end it really doesn't matter which flavor of skulduggery we think is the most probable. We see it as such, regardless of the details.
I value each human life equally, and by that standard it's not rocket science to figure out who the bad guys are.
I don't believe all the conspiracy storys
What does stick in my mind is the way the World trade buildings fell .
They all fell straight down exactly like controlled demolition .
In my opinion high rise buildings don't normally fall that way . They are designed to remain standing even if a major fire breaks out.
In my opinion the chances of a building as tall as any of the world trade center buildings falling straight down into itself from an uncontrolled fire is smaller than the chances of winning a lottery .
Yet ........we are lead to believe that it happened 3 times in one day.
And building 7 didn't even have any direct damage from the planes.
No fuel from the planes would have made it to building 7
gary
AS far as the towers go if you were ever inside during construction as I was you would have a completely different opinion As far as number 7 that was spooky that had some serious iron Chet
does it matter planes or no planes>?. the fact is they fooled everyone and look how many years later it is, and nothing has be done, yet they keep fooling you., its a fools world!. you can debate it all you like,nothing is done about it and they will stick it to you more and more because they can., so sit back and enjoy.
Quote from: ramset on March 08, 2008, 12:37:14 AM
AS far as the towers go if you were ever inside during construction as I was you would have a completely different opinion As far as number 7 that was spooky that had some serious iron Chet
Ramset
can you name ANY other high rise building that has EVER fallen into its own basement because of an uncontrolled fire .........anywere .....?
gary
well BO you sound very informed what course of action have you decided to take about all the fooling Chet
ONE a ten story deep basement is not hard to fall into in thirty years of testing highrise buildings in NYC I NEVER saw anything put together the way the towers were.No steel beams Chet
Quote from: ramset on March 08, 2008, 01:12:22 AM
ONE a ten story deep basement is not hard to fall into in thirty years of testing highrise buildings in NYC I NEVER saw anything put together the way the towers were.No steel beams Chet
I will take that as a no ..........you have never seen any other high rise building fall into its own basement because of something like a fire.
I do agree that the towers were built a little different ........a higher percentage of the load was carried by the outer walls than normal . But they still had central cores . To fall straight down like that you have to take out the core.
If the core is not taken out .....the building may fall but it will fall to one side or another.
The planes could have taken out the upper part of the cores of the towers ........but the lower part of the cores would be intact .
If the lower part of the cores were intact the rubble would have stripped the floors from them but left them standing .....
gary
Quote from: one on March 08, 2008, 12:27:15 AM
In my opinion high rise buildings don't normally fall that way .
You don't know anything about how the World Trade Center is supposed to fall. In a more general sense, I am sure you have not seen lots of high rise building fall due to massive damage inflicted, so you have no idea how any highrise is supposed to fall when hit by a large plane. So you are just making stuff up.
Also, and I have brought this up before, what the hell is the motive for a conspiracy? To invade Iraq? Why weren't some iraqis framed as hijackers. Instead, we have people from our so called "ally", Saudi Arabia, which we cannot actually invade.
And who green-lit this way-more-complex-than-necessary scheme? I mean, they could have just blown up the towers with explosives and said the terrorists did it. After all, it had been tried before. Why introduce this massively complex scheme with real or fake planes?
Here is what the plan must have sounded like (from Rolling Stone magazine):
BUSH: So, what's the plan again?
CHENEY: Well, we need to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. So what we've decided to do is crash a whole bunch of remote-controlled planes into Wall Street and the Pentagon, say they're real hijacked commercial planes, and blame it on the towelheads; then we'll just blow up the buildings ourselves to make sure they actually fall down.
RUMSFELD: Right! And we'll make sure that some of the hijackers are agents of Saddam Hussein! That way we'll have no problem getting the public to buy the invasion.
CHENEY: No, Dick, we won't.
RUMSFELD: We won't?
CHENEY: No, that's too obvious. We'll make the hijackers Al Qaeda and then just imply a connection to Iraq.
RUMSFELD: But if we're just making up the whole thing, why not just put Saddam's fingerprints on the attack?
CHENEY: (sighing) It just has to be this way, Dick. Ups the ante, as it were. This way, we're not insulated if things go wrong in Iraq. Gives us incentive to get the invasion right the first time around.
BUSH: I'm a total idiot who can barely read, so I'll buy that. But I've got a question. Why do we need to crash planes into the Towers at all? Since everyone knows terrorists already tried to blow up that building complex from the ground up once, why don't we just blow it up like we plan to anyway, and blame the bombs on the terrorists?
RUMSFELD: Mr. President, you don't understand. It's much better to sneak into the buildings ourselves in the days before the attacks, plant the bombs and then make it look like it was exploding planes that brought the buildings down. That way, we involve more people in the plot, stand a much greater chance of being exposed and needlessly complicate everything!
CHENEY: Of course, just toppling the Twin Towers will never be enough. No one would give us the war mandate we need if we just blow up the Towers. Clearly, we also need to shoot a missile at a small corner of the Pentagon to create a mightily underpublicized additional symbol of international terrorism -- and then, obviously, we need to fake a plane crash in the middle of fucking nowhere in rural Pennsylvania.
RUMSFELD: Yeah, it goes without saying that the level of public outrage will not be sufficient without that crash in the middle of fucking nowhere.
CHENEY: And the Pentagon crash -- we'll have to do it in broad daylight and say it was a plane, even though it'll really be a cruise missile.
BUSH: Wait, why do we have to use a missile?
CHENEY: Because it's much easier to shoot a missile and say it was a plane. It's not easy to steer a real passenger plane into the Pentagon. Planes are hard to come by.
BUSH: But aren't we using two planes for the Twin Towers?
CHENEY: Mr. President, you're missing the point. With the Pentagon, we use a missile, and say it was a plane.
BUSH: Right, but I'm saying, why don't we just use a plane and say it was a plane? We'll be doing that with the Twin Towers, right?
CHENEY: Right, but in this case, we use a missile. (Throws hands up in frustration) Don, can you help me out here?
RUMSFELD: Mr. President, in Washington, we use a missile because it's sneakier that way. Using an actual plane would be too obvious, even though we'll be doing just that in New York.
BUSH: Oh, OK.
RUMSFELD: The other good thing about saying that it was a passenger jet is that that way, we have to invent a few hundred fictional victims and account for a nonexistent missing crew and plane. It's always better when you leave more cover story to invent, more legwork to do and more possible holes to investigate. Doubt, legwork and possible exposure -- you can't pull off any good conspiracy without them.
BUSH: You guys are brilliant! Because if there's one thing about Americans -- they won't let a president go to war without a damn good reason. How could we ever get the media, the corporate world and our military to endorse an invasion of a secular Iraqi state unless we faked an attack against New York at the hands of a bunch of Saudi religious radicals? Why, they'd never buy it. Look at how hard it was to get us into Vietnam, Iraq the last time, Kosovo?
CHENEY: Like pulling teeth!
RUMSFELD: Well, I'm sold on the idea. Let's call the Joint Chiefs, the FAA, the New York and Washington, D.C., fire departments, Rudy Giuliani, all three networks, the families of a thousand fictional airline victims, MI5, the FBI, FEMA, the NYPD, Larry Eagleburger, Osama bin Laden, Noam Chomsky and the fifty thousand other people we'll need to pull this off. There isn't a moment to lose!
BUSH: Don't forget to call all of those Wall Street hotshots who donated $100 million to our last campaign. They'll be thrilled to know that we'll be targeting them for execution as part of our thousand-tentacled modern-day bonehead Reichstag scheme! After all, if we're going to make martyrs -- why not make them out of our campaign paymasters? Shit, didn't the Merrill Lynch guys say they needed a refurbishing in their New York offices?
aren't we in a "global war on terror"? lots of reasons to initiate a global war if you are the right people. *shrug*
my question in return is, why is it necessary to create/continue a deceptive and suppressive system of control instead of working towards a greater good, in which "they" are still in control?
ie: why suppress helpful technologies?
Shrug I agree WHOEVER did this was VERY evil and trying to kill hundreds of thousands not thousands and trying to kill our economy pretty much screwing the whole planet P.S. ONE I also ran demo crews in NYC for almost ten yrs' safely taking down fire damaged buildings and was called in bye the head engineer of the port authority in the previous attack Chet
@all I wont be posting in this thread anymore It hits to close to home I'm not putting my head in the sand Its just that the rest of the forum is so inspirational and at this time in my life I REALLY LIKE THAT!!! I just had to add my 2 cents Chet
Quote
In my opinion high rise buildings don't normally fall that way .
You don't know anything about how the World Trade Center is supposed to fall. In a more general sense, I am sure you have not seen lots of high rise building fall due to massive damage inflicted, so you have no idea how any highrise is supposed to fall when hit by a large plane. So you are just making stuff up.
Shuggedatlas
My first post in this thread started with this
Quote
I don't believe all the conspiracy storys
What does stick in my mind is the way the World trade buildings fell .
They all fell straight down exactly like controlled demolition .
That is what I do know.
It is what I will continue to believe as long as I live.
I don't believe alot of the conspiracy theorys .
I have no clue about why anyone would do such things .
I have no clue about why our goverment would lie to us about such things
All I know is that it happens.
I do have a pretty good understanding of how buildings fall ........and no one here has came up with any examples of buildings that have fallen neatly into their basements ( exactly like controlled demolition ) without actually using controlled demolition . an uncontrolled fire simply does not cause damage symmetrically enough to bring a building straight down.
The trade center towers all fell exactly like controlled demolition .
That is what sticks in my head ...... I don't want to accept the conspiracy theory's .........but something is not right
As far as just making things up ........... If you want a good idea of who really enjoys just making things up , please review the part of your post I did not quote.
This willl be my only reply to you on this subject
From your other posts in general it is my opinion that you come here mostly just to argue.
I am not here to entertain you.
gary
The discussion I posted was made up, but the point was the idiocy of such a plot. Why do something so massively complex and easy to expose, when something simpler would suffice. Forget the physical evidence. If what is there right now is not enough to convince you, nothing ever will. But try to come up with plot that involves what happened and see how that can possibly get off the drawing board. I challenge you to come up with one. Pretend you are trying to convince a jury that something like this was hatched in the back rooms. Remember, it has to cover:
1. The real or fictional people on the planes - why go through all that trouble to use planes.
2. Why a missile and not a plane in the Pentagon, given planes are already being used?
3. Why take down building 7, that has no people and causes no additional outrage?
4. Why have planes hit the towers at all, when a simple demolition will do?
5. Why take down a plane in the middle of nowhere in PA?
6. Why harm the many Bush campaign donors who had offices in WTC?
7. Why not plant evidence that Saddam was involved, if the goal was to invade Iraq?
I am sure I am leaving out some things, but you get the idea. Just try to come up with a plausible plan that needs to involve ALL of the above. And "they're evil and crazy" does not cut it. Anyone who pulled this off without a single lowly plot peon coming forth, in exchange for immunity and millions of dollars in book rights, and saying "I was involved and here is what I know," was not crazy. This was executed flawlessly. No one squealed. So how can such masterminds greenlight a crazy scheme like this?
Oh, and lastly, if it was so easy to pull this massive scheme off, why not plant the damn WMDs in Iraq? How much egg on face has the administration had to wipe off because there were no WMDs in Iraq? Compared to executing 9/11, planting WMDs is cake!
Try to expand the scope of what you are imagining.
See
National Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD 51)
and
Homeland Security Presidential Directive 20 (HSPD 20)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=K3dAnSMzUlo (http://youtube.com/watch?v=K3dAnSMzUlo)
....signed May 2007, which allow the president to declare martial law and seize control of national, state, local, tribal, and corporate government in the event of a loosely defined "catastrophic emergency". Could that include a mortgage crisis? Bank failures? A run on the dollar?
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg232.imageshack.us%2Fimg232%2F4627%2Fscmb7.png&hash=b44f401c4b9f7056e0412f36826ae450f1aef8f9)
With every vote you cast you perpetuate the cycle of fiscal abuse/wage slavery.
"If you build it...they will play it."
Regards...
@ EVERYONE
http://www.taxitothedarkside.com/
Click on the Timeline tab and read how the Geneva Convention is being circumnavigated.
The U.S. is being 'set up' for a BIG fall, by who?.....
Some say, by the same organization you think you defeated in your last revolution !
CROWN CORPORATION
City of London (Financial)
City of Columbia (Military)
Vatican City (Religion)
All 3 are not part of the Country's in which they are situated. But still control the world.
Note that a cynical person is suspicious of apparently good things and people, whereas a person who is sceptical about something is cautious about believing or accepting it.
If in doubt turn on your Television
just keep voting for Ron Paul 8)
Even Ron Paul is part of the deception.
Offer the rope of hope to the desperate and they will reach for it every time...until there is nothing left to hold on to.
We are being taken big time folks!
And if the story's and accounts of independent former insiders coming forward are to be believed, the 'takers' are worse than your worst nightmare - and are sick and depraved well beyond imagination.
I have to say that even without the same sightings and occurrences noted in many independent accounts and knowing what I already know to be true, people like Bush, Cheney, Bliar, and Canada's Stevious Harper are such obvious liars.
One it seems must certainly have to really work at self delusion to not notice their obvious shifty and deceptive demeanor ...and who is a worse and more right in your face liar than Bush for gods sake ?
Meanwhile, if the clear thinking people on this planet do not soon mobilize, we as a free society are done for.
When you think about it...other than the Vatican, haw many plethoras of pedophiles could ever get away with decades of decadent demeanor ? None, thats how many.
And why is that...?
And why is it that not one world, or for that matter, any local or regional leader, ever stepped forward to denounce what was done to those kids ?
And why is it that no one has ever held the Vatican accountable as accessories for intentionally placing known pedophile priests into unsuspecting parishes...where they could continue to satisfy their perverted desires...knowingly destroying the lives of many additional children in the process.
The only reason the Vatican escaped prosecution that makes sense to me is, the Vatican pulls the strings of the world.
Judging the Vatican solely from past behavior...any atheist is more godly than they will ever be.
If anyone can come up with an alternate theory that makes more sense I would certainly consider it.
Regards...
I agree with what's been said. I don't have anything against Ron Paul. . . We just can't depend on a hero to come save us.
Can't think of a more exciting time in the history of the universe to be alive!
Quote from: Cap-Z-ro on March 09, 2008, 06:56:02 PM
The only reason the Vatican escaped prosecution that makes sense to me is, the Vatican pulls the strings of the world.
Vatican City is a sovereign nation, so it is not so easy to prosecute or sue someone there. Also, the Catholic churches of the world do not make a big corporation, with Vatican City as its head, as you are trying to make it out. So while it is easy to allege that everyone up the line knew what was going on, it could be very difficult to prove using evidence admissible in court.
@Nomen
look where paul ended up - on the outskirts of his own party.
And surprise of surprises, war mongering political dinosaur McCain gets the party nomination.
Whether Paul was playing a role or not is not the issue - he served as a distraction as was planned.
Its all bait and switch - just like the democracy game.
There is no democracy...there never was.
When one person at the top makes all the important decisions...that person is by definition a dictator.
Ergo the entire world is living under one oppressive dictator or another.
Just because someone pisses on your foot and tells you its raining doesn't make it so.
Its high time we all started catching on.
Hell...we all could have been living in the lap of luxury right now...if it weren't for the 10% criminally insane living among us, who we have allowed to gradually make the pursuit of the dollar the focus of our existence, instead of what life was meant to be...the pursuit of happiness.
End result - wasted lives...over and over and over.
And the end of tonights rant.
Regards...