The March Towards Socialism Part 5

socialism1Really? I have found the ability to write enough on this subject to warrant 5 parts? As a matter of fact I have. And you know why? Because this march was not started recently. It has been a long and slow march. But we are in the home stretch of this series, which hopefully is not the home stretch for the country as well. Tonight we will handle the run-up to President Obama. He will certainly warrant his own post as that is the evil of socialism/fascism that we can confront. The rest of these folks aren’t in power any longer, so we can’t do much but look at what they did to help the cause along. It is not that I want to live in the past. It is only that I wanted, with this series, to provide some idea of the scope of how long this build-up has been going on, so that you will understand how we got here and how difficult it will be to change course. I hope that there are those among you noticing that a certain thing is missing from this march to socialism series…

And that missing thing is partisanship. Too often lately I have been accused of espousing conservative views while ignoring the ills of the Republicans. I must take a moment to make something clear to all who are reading. There is no partisanship in this series because the steps taken towards socialism have come from both parties. As I said, Republicans have had a tendency to slow down a bit, but never reverse course. Both sides are responsible for where we are today. Both christians and homosexuals have pushed their agendas. Both blacks and whites have driven this train. And remember as I refer to liberals, which makes some thing biased against Democrats, you have to adhere to what MY definition was from the previous parts when judging my statements.

democrats-suckLet me make something crystal clear to all who are calling me a partisan hack, who is only interested in pushing my views on the unsuspecting readers of this blog. I am conservative on some issues. I believe in smaller government, lower taxes for EVERYONE, and constitutional adherence. I am liberal on some issues. I believe in a woman’s right to choose and that gay couples should have every right that straight couples have. I am all over the place. But those are my views. And mine alone. You are all free to believe what I believe… or not. It isn’t my concern. My concern is that you use that ten pound piece of flesh in your skull and apply critical thinking to every single thing you hear, from me, from BF, from JAC, from Ray, from CF, the MSM, Fox News, whoever.

republicans-suckAt this point I do not support either of the two parties representing us in Congress. We have jokingly referred to some of us here as the VLDG Party. That would be the only party I swear allegiance to. As little government as possible in today’s reality. I am not naive enough to think we can go back to 1776 and have almost no government. But it can get smaller and smaller until it is as unobtrusive in our lives as possible. It will take time. It will take effort. And it will take a reverse of course, because for 200 years government has done nothing but grow in power and scope under 100% of the Presidents elected. And if your belief is the same as mine, great. If it isn’t I am happy to debate the level of my sanity.

Back to the topic. I have to admit that I haven’t done this series 100% on my own. I primarily have. But here and there I have asked a certain reader for their thoughts on what I am thinking and they have been generous to provide me with some different perspectives and some information that I didn’t already have. I won’t name that person simply because I am not sure that they want to be named. However, when I directly quote what they have written I will highlight it in this color so that you know it is their wisdom, not mine. In asking about tonight’s post, they provided me with some thoughts and did so by addressing movements rather than certain Presidencies. And that makes more sense once we get past Johnson and Nixon, so I will switch to that at this point, with some highlights of certain Presidents. I hope they don’t mind that I have taken their idea in doing so.

The Presidencies from Ford forward were all very similar in terms of growth of government. The lone exception was Ronald Reagan who really did believe in shrinking government from encroaching on our lives, but was unable to gain the support from Congress needed to really make that happen. One of the biggest changes we saw after Nixon was the real rise of the environmental movement in the United States. I believe that this movement started with the best intentions, and is still rallied around today because no one can see a “bad” in taking care of the planet. Likewise, for the average citizen who is unwilling to spend the significant time to research the way that I have, the claims of environmentalists seem “irrefutable” even though it seems very little is proven. However, in accepting those claims, we have allowed that movement to push for and get implemented far too many pieces of legislation that were harmful to our individual liberty, without the promised benefits of doing so.

In 1970, Nixon signed into law the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The law established a U.S. national policy promoting the enhancement of the environment.  NEPA’s most significant effect was to set up procedural requirements for all federal government agencies to prepare Environmental Assessments (EAs) and Environmental Impact Statements (EISs), which contain statements of the environmental effects of proposed federal agency actions. The law has since been applied to any project, federal, state or local, that involves federal funding or work performed by the federal government. Want to understand why government is so inefficient? How about this… Every project must have these reports done. If 5 different agencies are working on a project together, each of them has to compile and submit their own version of the reports, at an estimated $200k per report.

LBJ Signs Wilderness Act

LBJ Signs Wilderness Act

 

The Wilderness Act of 1964 created the legal definition of wilderness in the US, and protected some 9 million acres of federal land. The initial statutory wilderness areas, designated in the Act, comprised 9.1 million acres of national forest wilderness areas in the US previously protected by administrative orders. The law limits uses to those consistent with the Wilderness Act mandate, for example, logging and oil and gas drilling are prohibited.

The most important thing about the Wilderness Act is that when Congress designates each wilderness area, it includes a very specific boundary line—in statutory law. Once added to the System, its protection and boundary can only be altered by another act of Congress. So who cares about the control of these 9.1 million acres? How about the additions to the protected areas, as today the Wilderness System comprises over 106 million acres. How does this apply to government control? If a heavily weighted Congress determines that an oil rich area, such as ANWR, is wilderness, it will take another act of that body to release the rights to develop those resources. And you know how much regulation and control will come along with that release.

The most recent review of inventoried roadless areas began in 1998 and was finished in 2000 and culminated in a set of Forest Service regulations in 2001 that are collectively known as the Roadless Rule. The Roadless Rule of 2001 is without debate the most far-reaching conservation action taken by the federal government since the Wilderness Act of 1964. The rule does not specifically protect roadless areas from development nor does it strictly prohibit multiple use activities on these lands. Specifically, the rule was aimed at controlling the amount of road-building activities undertaken by the forest service, which has more miles of roads under its control than thUS Interstate Highway Service. Environmentalists wanted no roads built on these lands and now has legislation to keep that from happening.

smokestack-lawsuitsThe Federal government has enacted a series of clean air acts, beginning with the Air Pollution Control Act of 1955, and followed by the Clean Air Act of 1963, the Air Quality Act of 1967, the Clean Air Act Extension of 1970, and Clean Air Act Amendments in 1977 and 1990. The 1990 amendment proposed emissions trading, added provisions for addressing acid rain, ozone depletion, and toxic air pollution, and established a national permits program. In April 2007 the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA violated the Clean Air act by not regulating greenhouse gas emissions (Still think the courts don’t have the ability to impact legislation?).

The Clean Air Acts are specifically relevant today as they are the basis for so many of the actions the progressive liberal agenda is pursuing. For example, Cap and Trade is being pursued, as we have discussed here, and the authorization for government to take this type of action regulating and controlling private industry is based in the provisions set forth by the Clean Air Act. Ultra-liberal Henry Waxman cited them as the precedent for government having the right to move forward with his upcoming legislation, the American Clean Energy and Security Act. It is the Clean Air Act that EPA just used to list CO2 as health hazard.

red-cockaded-woodpecker

Dang Woodpecker!

The Endangered Species Act was something that sure sounded good. Under this Act the federal government is able to act to protect species and also “the ecosystems upon which they depend.”  Sounds OK, however Clinton took this act a step further and expanded it to cover privately owned land as well. Some of the law’s provisions prevent private landowners from doing anything on their land that would damage the habitat of endangered plants, birds or animals. This means that the federal government can come in and control your land, appropriating it for an endangered species, without fairly compensating you for that land as provided for in the Constitution. Sunk your life savings into buying that ten acres of land to build a house on and retire. You better hope a red cockaded woodpecker doesn’t move in before you do or you are screwed. (Those little birds are all over NC, we know them well. I pray they don’t move in on my land).

I think you are all seeing the trend here. While environmental protection and conservation are noble ideas, government officials with very green ideologies and appellant courts filled with progressives have created a system ripe for control that strangles a free country and its people.  The result is increased lobbying to reduce impacts, thus more money and more corruption in congress. The larger result has been that the government uses these environmental acts not to better the environment, but instead to control the actions of corporations and private industry. If the Federal Government chose to exercise their full power under these laws, they can control the uses on virtually every acre of land in the USA.

A second large movement was the increase in federal entitlement programs that provide for the poor in America. After the Great Society legislation of the 60’s, for the first time a person who was not elderly or disabled could receive a living from the United States government. Programs set up included general welfare, health care through medicaid, food stamps, special payments for pregnant women and young mothers, and housing benefits provided by the federal government. In 1968, only 4.1% of families were headed by a woman on welfare. By 1980, this increased to 10% (Frum, 2000). Welfare was considered an open ended right by many in America by this point, as the government had successfully created a dependent society, which they have generally increased over time in order to maintain control. Many Americans now see government assistance as both a “right” and, unfortunately, a way of life. 

clinton-smarmyThen along came the Welfare Reform Act of 1996. The reforms, begun by Reagan and signed into law by Clinton, instead placed a finite time limit on how long one could receive benefits. The goal instead changed to providing short term cash assistance while quickly steering people into jobs. Prior to reform, states were given “limitless” money by the federal government, increasing per family on welfare, under the 60-year-old Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program. This gave states no incentive to direct welfare funds to the neediest recipients or to encourage individuals to go off welfare (the state lost federal money when someone left the system). One child in seven nationwide received AFDC funds, which mostly went to able-bodied single mothers (NY Times, 2/2/2009).

The new program, known as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), amounts from the federal government were given out on a flat rate per state based on population. It encourages some form of employment search in order to qualify, and sets a 5 year limit on the amount of time one can receive cash assistance. Millions of people left the welfare rolls (a 60% drop overall), employment rose, and the child poverty rate was reduced. A 2007 Congressional Budget Office study found that incomes in affected families rose by 35%. The Times called the reform “one of the few undisputed triumphs of American government in the past 20 years.”

One aspect that I want to touch quickly because we will cover it more in depth in Part 6 as we discuss the Obama administration. During the campaign, Obama claimed to support the reforms. Obama said: “Before welfare reform, you had, in the minds of most Americans, a stark separation between the deserving working poor and the undeserving welfare poor. What welfare reform did was desegregate those two groups. Now, everybody was poor, and everybody had to work.” That did not stop him from signing the Economic Stimulus Act of 2009, which will largely reverse the welfare-to-work provisions that Clinton instituted. One of the experts (Robert Rector) who worked on the 1996 bill said that the provisions would lead to the largest one-year increase in welfare spending in American history. More on this later.

hillary-std-questionBefore I get too high on our favorite sex addict President, I must also point out that his administration is responsible for what I consider possibly one of the most socialist movements that this country has experienced. Pushed by first lady Hillary, was the first call for a National Health Care system. This is the first attempt to impose a purely socialist solution on an American industry. Believe me we will get into health care, as I have at least two separate articles devoted just to this coming up. Once that monster was set loose, we have never been able to fully contain it again, and now we are seeing Obama already getting some legislation passed and seeking more, that takes her plan to a whole new level. 

Prior to Clinton, Bush Sr. was also responsible for the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), although ratification and signing of the agreement was done by Clinton. With this, government was clearly taking action to determine winners and losers in private industry. American textiles and forest products companies got the shaft so others like high tech could thrive. Securing U.S. congressional approval for NAFTA would have been impossible without addressing public concerns about NAFTA’s environmental impact (After all this was the era of VP “I am the environmental God” Al Gore). The Clinton administration negotiated a side agreement on the environment with Canada and Mexico, the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC). Yet more government control over companies through the use of environmental assessments and penalties. 

I also wanted to include here a very interesting view provided by that contributor I mentioned earlier, so I have pasted a section here that they provided to me, because their explanation was far better worded than mine on this subject:

There are two major changes that occurred in our nation beginning with Clinton.  Fascism/socialism requires control of government first and then control of private sector.  Administrations are often undermined by agencies with historic perspectives and long term missions that may differ.  Clinton is the first modern president who placed friends of their agenda in the lowest levels of government and used various Legal branches of agencies to place lawyers sympathetic to the agenda.  The result was a synchronized use of govt agencies and private media outlets to control the message received by the public.  The media went along fat dumb and happy, until Monica. Bush backed off some of the very low appointments and did not manipulate nearly as much as the Algorians and Clintonistas.  But he still used attorneys and played the new conservative media like a fiddle, until Iraq went to hell.

The second biggest event in this period is what I call the complete capitulation of our titans of industry to the fascist/socialist agenda.  Can you name any major industry leaders who are speaking out against what has happened from Clinton up to today. During Clinton and Bush I saw CEO’s of the countries largest wood products companies decide to go green, abandon sound forest mgt practices for politically correct and accept green certification programs, which had been designed to black mail them into submission.  Lowes and Home Depot stopped selling cedar flooring and decking because the Sierra Club and others declared it an old growth species.  Despite the fact most of it came from privately owned second growth forests in Washington, Idaho and Montana.

The supposed protectors of capitalism now talk about partnerships and cooperative agreements with govt.  Look at Google, GE, GM, and lord knows who else.  I believe this marks the watershed where fascism finally gains control over major segments of our economy.  Up until Clinton/Bush goverment exerted control over the private sector primarily through tax bills and restrictive regulations.  Since then the move has been to outright and open coordination and cooperation.

I completely agree with this assessment and I think it is important to understand that this has happened. 

The final part I will add here is the aberration that is called the Patriot Act. We suffered an attack at the hands of terrorists (and if anyone jumps in here and claims that Bush actually masterminded this and 9/11 is a conspiracy, I might snap). I get that. But the fear of another one has been the catalyst for many, many other things, including the upcoming legislation that would give Obama the ability to shut down the internet (Talk about silencing the opposition! A separate article on this coming soon). The Patriot Act will warrant a special article all its own soon as well. So I won’t get into it. But you all know what it is. And I would have to say it is possibly one of the biggest violations of privacy our government has ever taken. I don’t know if it qualifies as part of the “March to Socialism” or not, but it sure is a big move by government. 

So there is Part 5. I know it was a long section and a lot to read. But hopefully I didn’t get too in depth about things so that it was not too difficult of a read. I look forward to everyone’s thoughts on this. I also look forward to the additional information some of you will provide. At this point we are talking about era’s that many of us lived through. Which means many of you will have personal insights that can help us understand this all better. References for a couple of statistics are below. 

 

Frum, D. (2000). How We Got Here: The ’70s. New York, New York: Basic Books

Welfare Aid Isn’t Growing as Economy Drops Off“. The New York Times200902-02.

Advertisements

Comments

  1. Great article, very in depth and to the facts.

  2. I guess my question is “Why?” Why the ever increasing power grabs of an ever larger government, advocated for by political leaders across the spectrum? Is it to gain more power? Is it to “grow” their business, much like a private business owner seeks to grow theirs? Is it to grow their constituencies so as to enable them to remain in power for as long as possible? The founding fathers warned us myriad times that this would happen. They saw the pitfalls in our form of government, but were their fears based upon an assessment of man’s natural inclinations or something else altogether? We have to ascertain the motivations which drive our government further and further from the core principles espoused in the Constitution before we try to right the ship. In other words, we have to diagnose the disease. Then we can come up with a game plan to try and cure it.

    • Richmond Spitfire says:

      Hi Madmom,

      I think you are onto something there…determine the motives and address those. And, I think those motives can vary from person to person; in addition, other symptoms of disease can appear overtime.

      For some, money = power
      For others, power = money

      Regards,
      RS

      • esomhillgazette says:

        You are right in that assessment RS.

        And good Morning to you on this bright sunny Monday! 🙂

    • We can do nothing, except prepare for whatever is coming our way. I’m looking forward to Black Flag’s answer to your question. If it were possible, I’d say vote everyone out of office and start fresh, but that very unlikely, unless other factors come into play that make it happen on it’s own. Most of our fellow Americans are blind to whats going on. I WAS like that as well, but began to open my eyes and see for myself.

      G!

      • Richmond Spitfire says:

        Hey G-Man!

        Yes, but don’t we at least owe it to the principles for which this country was founded to give it our best — while preparing for worse in parallel? That’s what I’m planning on doing…

        Hope you are having a wonderful day…It is absolutely beautiful here in Richmond!

        Regards,
        RS

        • Good Morning RS, we’ve had great weather for 4 days here in NE Ohio, set a record high yesterday!
          We are giving it our best, just by discussing it here. It’s a slow process, but if one new person comes onboard everyday, and tells two more people, and they do the same, eyes will be opened.

          Have a great day!

          G!

          • RWBoveroux says:

            G-Man:

            Are you saying the solution to this counry’s problems is to talk about them? Respectfully, what about turning that talk into action?

            VR
            RWB

      • CWO2USNRet says:

        Voting them out and starting fresh with mainstream non-professional politicians is the whole point of the GOOOH.com concept. This is not the first clean house idea to ever come along, but it is the first that could/might actually work.

      • If you vote everyone out of office it wouldn’t change anything. The agenda has been interweaved into everything so even if we cleaned out, the agenda is so deeply rooted, that we would have to dig roots and dig some dead bodies up before we can even begin to attempt to fix the problem. Think about…what the heck would we do with the problems that we already face let alone all the secret agendas and just secrets period being pushed around on Capital Hill. I might just be pessimistic on this one but I don’t think there is anything we can do now but prepare ourselves and our family for doomsday. Learning how to be self-sufficent is a start. I am not saying give up and I want give up as we can slow them down…we can win the battles but unless everyone in the world wakes up which will not happy until our “leading dictator” I mean our “leading president” get on TV and spill the beans to the world…by then, it will be too late as we are on the edge now.

    • The entire concept of regulating a society is “we know better”. To accomplish this you indeed have to fill the halls with like minded souls and nothing says “we’re doing something” to the masses who got us there (barring actual accomplishment) like big government. Left or right, whomever is “owed” by the election cycle still crows until they get their very own committee. Proof of their agenda being actualized.

      As for the doers themselves, listen to your own CSPAN some time and then the same at the next party you attend. The similarities in pomp from the guy who has of course “done everything, far better than you and under infinitely more duress so listen up” and those in congress will absolutely leave you gobsmacked. Yup, one and the same. Even those few who have indeed joined in for the betterment of “something” carry that same seed of ego, “I know better”.

      Want to seriously challenge the game? Make note of their platforms, a list of how far they have strayed from each point and spam away. Any way you can make your presence felt in the blue nothing is what you can do.

      As has done USWeapon right here.

      • No my response is not to do nothing…my response is to PREPARE…nothing we say or do will change the agenda of the WhiteHouse…Revolution; the government is ready and once they take our guns (and they will which will cause the revolution, they will kill us by bio-war fare…those that aren’t killed and confirmed will be marked with the mark of the beast (human RFID microchips) the rest will be slaughter, placed in concentration camps, ect. Think it can’t happen in America…don’t be sure!?

      • No my response is not to do nothing…my response is to PREPARE…nothing we say or do will change the agenda of the WhiteHouse or Capital Hill…Revolution; the government is ready and once they take our guns (and they will which will cause the revolution, they will kill us by bio-war fare…those that aren’t killed and confirmed will be marked with the mark of the beast (human RFID microchips) the rest will be slaughter, placed in concentration camps, ect. Think it can’t happen in America…don’t be sure!?

  3. US,
    Thank you so much for doing the research on this topic. It has given me greater understanding of the development of socialism. (Not to mention more ammunition to aim at my ‘progressive’ friends. 😉 )

  4. You are delustional. Seek. Help. Fast.

    • Richmond Spitfire says:

      Hi Tom,

      I guess I’ll be the first to ask…Why do you say that?

      Have a wonderful day and kind regards,

      RS

      • esomhillgazette says:

        I think we had another Drive by RS!;-)

        • Richmond Spitfire says:

          Howdy Esom!

          Yes, I think we did…

          Like our Mamas always told us…”Kill them with Kindness”. 😉

          It amazes me how many of those messages that Moms, Dads, Grandpas, Grandmas, Aunts/Uncles, etc. gave us…I just didn’t understand (or maybe I just chose not to)…and how they ring true now! The really funny thing is that when I use them with my kids, they sort of just give me a blank look…Must be history repeating itself. The only difference is that I try to explain what I meant.

          I hope your day continues to be great! Hugs!

          RS

          • esomhillgazette says:

            My kids do indeed give me the same look I gave my parents when I was their age.

            When we are children, we tend to think that our parents are the dumbest folks on the face of the Earth. As we get older, they get smarter. Finally, as we reach maturity, (and have kids of our own) we discover what they had tried to tell us the whole time we were growing up. We were the dumb ones, not them! 🙂

            • Will Rogers said: When I was 16 I couldn’t believe how stupid the old man was but when I turned 21 I was amazed at what he had learned in 5 years.

              • And another bit of wisdom, don’t know the source:

                “If you believe the same things at 50, that you did at 20, you have wasted 30 years of your life.”

    • I’ve been accused of being dillusional many, many times. Would you mind helping me as to why I am that way.

      G!

    • Gee US, you are

      “delustional”, I believe that would mean “not lustional” or “not prone to lust”.

      I’m guessing your wife will be glad to here this.

      Smiling All The Way
      JAC

      • Yes, she will be quite pleased to find that out.

        Unless of course, Tom was say that I was unable to be lusted after…..
        In which case, that is just mean Tom.

    • esomhillgazette says:

      I too, am curious to know just why you said that Tom. An I also have to agree with JAC.
      😀

    • Looks like another drive by troll.

      • Black Flag says:

        So don’t shake their cage!

        In Poker, you want to encourage, not discourage, the ‘fish’. Without them, who would you take advantage of? 😉

  5. CWO2USNRet says:

    This whole march to socialism that’s being discussed here and elsewhere has a conspiracy flavor to it. It seems as if there is a multi-generational covert cabal of master manipulators tweaking our society, economy and government. Not being conspiracy minded, I don’t buy that explanation. But, I don’t dispute that we are, in fact, marching towards socialism. Or, more accurately, European Social Democracy.

    If it isn’t a conspiracy then what is it? I am coming around to BF’s view that it is simply a part of the natural evolution of government over time. BF, if I’m mis-paraphrasing your view please correct me. If this march is a natural progression then what? Reboot, reverse course, stop where we are?

    Advocating a reboot would likely get a person branded a right-wing extremist domestic terrorist. Anyway, it would be far too disruptive. Stopping where we are is tantamount to doing nothing and thus doomed to failure. We must figure out how to reverse course. The politicians will fight it till their last breath. To overcome that we have to awaken the sleeping bear that is mainstream America.

    Damn, I’m depressing myself.

    • Black Flag says:

      You have a good grasp of the essence of government.

      Government derives from exactly the same natural law as does freedom but as its equal and opposite reaction.

      The Law of Mutuality of Action –

      What I do to you, grants you the right to do to me.

      I am free if you do not impose upon me.

      For you not to impose upon me, requires me to not impose upon you.

      Then we are both free.

      However, if I have no fear of your mutuality – my punches are returned by your mere pokes – then we evolve to Might is Right, and I impose without recourse from you – and you become my slave. “Good for me, but not for you”.

      As long as the profit from violence exceeds its risks, we will have government – not as a tool to prevent violence but as the tool to MAXIMIZE VIOLENCE while minimizing the risks in its use.

      The legitimizing of government action is the best way to minimize the risks of using violence – as long as we, the People, believe government has a right to use violence, we support the action instead of fighting against it.

      So government becomes seeked by those who do evil.

      What better tool to improve the profit of their violence than use the tool to do it legitimately.

      When, we the People, no longer see these actions as legitimate, the risk profile of government violence reverses – it becomes very dangerous to be the government against the face of moral people.

      When the People finally decide that any use of violence upon non-violent people can never be justified, government tyranny will end at the same time.

      Yes, there will be those that still attempt – but they are called the “Mafia” and are criminals.

      • BF What is the origin of the Law of Mutuality of Action? The only references I can find seem to involve contract law and while those references make sense, I wanted to know if there were any unstated assumptions/implications… please & thank you c

        ps I haven’t seen any finance comments for a few days, I like it when you talk like that 😉

        • Black Flag says:

          Thank you!

          Is there a particular economic topic that you’d like to talk about?

          • Well, since you asked so nicely. 🙂
            China and Russia were calling for a new reserve currency prior to G20, nothing formal came out of that, unless you count rumors -and a promise of major money to the IMF which Mr. Obama promptly requested of congress (sorry small rant). The ugliest rumor being that Mrs. Clinton’s trip to Beijing involved promising ‘IMMINENT DOMAIN OF THE USA TO CHINA AS COLLATERAL’ in return for continuing to buy our treasuries.

            The day you were discussing gold and the various banks and certificates, the spot price shot up – apparently because China had significantly increased its gold holdings. Today, China’s calling for ‘reform’ and a ‘”diverse and sound” international currency system’.

            Is this the death knell for the dollar?

            It appears to me that the equity markets are held together by old chewing gum, fraying baling twine and prayers that are rapidly turning into whimpers. (of course that may be too negative of a take…)

            What am I missing, not looking at?

            thank you very much

            one more thing — For these types of discussions, are gold and bouillon two different things?

      • Black Flag says:

        It’s a natural law of human affairs – we know it by instinct.

        Watch to toddlers in the playground – one wacks the other, and the other wacks him back.

        What you do to me, allows me the right to do to you.

        http://goldenruleradical.org/archives/the-principle-of-mutuality

    • I agree and BF is on point like much of the people on this forum. This agenda that the Government has in store for us is so much bigger than the eye can see and what we discuss. your depressed…if you really knew what was going on you would be paranoid, depressed, ready for a revolution, stock-piling, ect. We seek the truth but once it is really exposed, we don’t want to hear it and discredit it…conspiracty theories???

  6. Calf Roper says:

    I have to take issue with only one point in your well-written article:

    “But it (government) can get smaller and smaller until it is as unobtrusive in our lives as possible. It will take time. It will take effort. And it will take a reverse of course, because for 200 years government has done nothing but grow in power and scope under 100% of the Presidents elected.”

    After much soul searching and learning from this site, I have to disagree. I no longer think it is possible for the Federal Government to actually reverse course. Why? Because of our two party system.

    My family are all Republicans, always have been and have always voted Republican. During Bush II, I saw for the first time that Republicans are no better than Democrats, they just provide a different side to the same story – more government, more power, more money. So, I became a Libertarian and a federalist. Primarily because I want to be part of a party that is actually for smaller government, doing away with the damn Federal Reserve, and giving power back to the individual.

    However, when I explained this to my own family who are also all for smaller government and less governmental intrustion, the answer I received was short, simple, and all the explanation I needed as to why the U.S. will never change course – “You can’t win.”

    You see, my family will always vote Republican no matter what. A third party, like the Libertarians, doesn’t have a chance in hell of ever gaining a strong foothold in Congress because the two-party system in our nation too perfectly pits Americans against one another.

    People like my family are clinging to the Republicans because it is much safer to have the “lesser of two evils” than it is to actually stand up for what you believe and risk having the liberal Democrats gain all the power.

    BF helped me to finally see the truth of this. Thanks BF.

    • Hey Roper

      I forgot to ask the other day. You mentioned elk hunting in Wyoming. Where abouts did you grow up there?
      I’ve spent alot of time in the western part, especially in my younger days.

      JAC

      • Calf Roper says:

        Grew up ranching in the Northeast corner near Hulett, Wyoming (close to Gillette, WY). Best whitetail deer hunting I have ever found and Area 1 is one of the best elk hunting areas in the State, if you can get drawn and get access to the private land. Usually you can as most of the ranchers want the elk to stay out of their hay yards anyway.

        Did you spend your time in the Tetons?

        • A lot of time in Tetons and Yellowstone country but also south to Rock Springs and then north east to Lander, Riverton, Thermopolys and Cody. Cody was especially fun in those days. Now it looks like any other strip mall town. Of course you could find fun trouble in Jackson and even Dubois back then.

          Was very close to your hometown last year. Daughter and I took trip and wound up at Devil’s Tower. That is some fine country you were raised in. We especially liked the big valley south of Sundance to Four Corners,on hwy 585 then north of Sundance to Devil’s Tower. Of course last year was the perfect year to see that part of the world. Even that stretch from Newcastle south to Lusk was still green in mid July. I don’t think I had ever seen southeast Montana and eastern Wyomng so green before. I was great.

          Also spent some time in the Medicine Bow Mtns south of Laramie, and of course the country bars in Laramie proper.

          You might say I am a cowboy/mountain man hybrid!!

          Best Wishes
          JAC

          • Calf Roper says:

            Definitely a man after my own heart. My grandparent’s ranch is actually about 10 miles north of Devils Tower and my great-grandfather’s ranch is just up Lyttle Creek which produces a large canyon that runs directly east of the Tower.

            Some of the most beautiful country in the U.S. I would wager.

  7. esomhillgazette says:

    I have to say that I agree with CWO2 that it is certainly depressing to think on. However, I think that there is a solution. I’m just not sure if it could ever be done. Most certainly not with the current Administration and Congress. Probably not even with the current Supreme Court.

    My solution would be a radical one. Starting in 2010, if we have that much time, we will have to vote out ALL current Congresspersons up for re-election. Also send the clear message that politics as usual is OVER! Then in 2012, continue that trend until we have a whole fresh new crop of Federal government officials.

    This solution would not be easy to accomplish, nor would it be fast. The first thing on the new agenda would be to cut the Deficit drastically. And the only way to accomplish this would be to drastically shrink the spending by drastically shrinking the size of the Government itself. This, in itself, would take time. Several years in fact. This would indeed be painful to some Americans. Especially those who depend upon the Feds to supply their livelihoods. Because that is one of the first things that would have to be addressed. Painful, but necessary. You cannot spend more than you take in. For a while, we might have to keep the tax system, with adjustments for more fairness, in place until the deficit was gone and we were again in the black instead of red.

    Also, this might require some changes in the Constitution in the form of new amendments. One such would be that if the Supremes begin to interfere, they too would have to be replaced. That right there would require Const changes. (I personally have never thought that the court should be a lifetime appointment anyway.) Another would be term limits on Congress. The longer an official stays in Office, generally, the more corrupt they become. A complete clearing of our elected officials every now and again would be a good thing IMO.

    As I said though, this would take time. I don’t know if we have that much time left or not. I hope we do. But only if we begin to change back more towards the ideals of our Founders. If not, well, in my opinion our Nation is doomed. We here and some others will make it either way, because we have the skills and brains to do so. A whole big lot of us will not be so lucky.

    People who do not know how to think for themselves have had it. Don’t think that I don’t give folks like this a chance. Some will survive because they will reach inside themselves and discover that they had the survival trait in them all along and just didn’t know it.

    If I sound like soon it will be Doomsday or Armageddon, that’s because I personally think it will be. At least as far as the United States is concerned. There would be somthing left, just not what we call America. And I for one don’t want to settle for less.

    • Esom,

      I echo your sentiments. I know what we “should” do, what we “need” to do, but have little hope of ever seeing it happen.

      I do think the tea parties are a good start. However, in the original tea party article comments, I asked if it turned anyone off to see the politicians as commentators, speakers, etc. at the tea parties. I think the Republicans are trying to position themselves to be the “voice” of the tea parties, (Gingrich, Huckabee, etc.) Now, I don’t know if those particular 2 are good or not, as politians go. But it does demonstrate that there is no getting away from them.

      Bottom line for me….Black Flag is probably right, no matter what we do, we can’t change a darn thing.

      My instinct is to fight, my reality is to prepare.

      • Dee. Those are my instincts also. It truly ticks me off that the people in this Country are so uncaring and apathetic as to let this happen to themselves.

        The Republican Party is too little, too late. They had their chance. But I do like the fact that some stood and said what they believed. No matter why they did. It will damage their standing with the mob.

      • Beautifully stated: My instinct is to fight, my reality is to prepare.

        As much as we all want to fight for her “American” truth is, PREPARE. We can scream, we can protest in peace, we can have great forums like this one and at the end of day none of this matters. The reality is, we need to prepare. It will be like the Quackers and Slavery…you will fight, just not the way you want too.

      • By the way, I give us to 12/2012…this will be the end of the world as we know it. So you have almost 3 years to prepare for the worst cause the worse is yet to come.

  8. Great Article, but I would like to see some discussion about how
    the current administration is using Acorn for voting fraud and Acorn and the US census to redistrict to insure that they maintain controll of the hose and senate. I believe this to be the 1st steps in seeing if they can get away with it and if they can the election in 2012 look to be a joke. Every man adn woman of voting age can vote against Mr. Obama and he will still win through overwelming fraud. If this trend continues the USA as we know it will no longer exist. Everyone says we can fight the system using the system to win but if your vote means nothing and everyone elses votes mean nothing its safe to assume that you can change nothing. I agree with the post about the only way to fix this is to fire all politicians and start from scratch before too many people wake up and realize whats going on leading to a 2nd US civil war. I hope this does not happen.
    Obama’s well on his way and lying the ground work in law to destroy our great country from withing. He has shown time and time again that he will wipe his rear with our constitution relying on the fact that everyone is afaid to cry foul because they will be labled racist and thier careers and credibility will be destroyed.

    • You can add O’Prompters idea of legallizing all the illegal immigrants. How many millions of votes would that get him!

      • Richmond Spitfire says:

        G-Man,

        This is a subject in particular that totally peeves me. Don’t have alot of time here, so I’ll try to be brief…

        These are “illegal” immigrants, right?

        When, How, Who, What, Where, Why did it somehow become the policy to “IGNORE” Law.

        Ooops…outta time! Must attend to a meeting.

        Regards,
        RS

      • esomhillgazette says:

        At the latest count somewhere between 11 and 20 MILLION!!! 😦

    • gs — I’ve been a part of the genealogy community online and on the ground for more than 10 years — When I first heard of ACORN’s involvement in the census, I was appalled — those records are a vital piece of our collective history. I wrote letters to DAR and other national organizations as well as many directors of the major genealogy libraries, hoping they would push this to their contacts. As an officer of my local society, I spoke on behalf of becoming involved with the census at the last meeting . I’ve gotten no response, not even ‘thank you for voicing your concern…’. It was like writing to my congressman. Is this apathy or something worse? c

  9. I’m going off subject for a moment. I work at a hospital here in NE Ohio. Everyone by now has heard of the swine flu outbreak. If this truns into a “pandemic”, it will get very ugly very quickly (I’m on the Emergency Planning Committee). One of the biggest concerns is with our youngest and eldest, they are most likely to have the worst effects. Take some time to read up on the best precautions for you and your family. Hand washing, often, is important. If you have kids in school, that should be beat into their heads. Sorry for being off subject!

    G!

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      Thanks for the warning G-Man. The big thing is, how long will it take Obama to turn the swine-flu “pandemic” into a way to interject more government control into our lives and also use it as a way to push Univeral Health Care? I would be willing to bet that as soon as more than 100 Americans are verified to have this virus, you won’t here anything else on CCCPNN and PMSNBC but how it is affecting minorities and the poor disproportionately and proves the need for Nationalized Health Care.

      Just watch… if it isn’t happening already, it will shortly.

      • esomhillgazette says:

        Man Pete!!

        Why did you have to say that? I say this because you’re right! That’s exactly what will happen if it starts to spread.

        And the bad thing is. It will be done for pure Political gain. The Minorities and Poor will STILL be disproportionately affected by it. Only then we’ll have another boondoggle to pay for with our sweat and blood.

        The problem with that is, I’m almost out of sweat and blood!

      • It’s serious but another distraction can we say Kathleen Sebelius confirmed as Sec. of Health and Human Services. They are talking about pushing a vaccine like they did back in the 1900’s that all citizens will have to take. Learn your history or you are doomed to repeat it. http://www.haverford.edu/biology/edwards/disease/viral_essays/warnervirus.htm I don’t know about you all but I want volunteer to take it just like I don’t get vaccinated for H3N1 the regular flu virus. It’s a bigger agenda people…a huge underlined agenda. Remember Obama and his cabinet all have quoted “a crisis is a terrible thing to waste…Why? What are we wasting? It’s serious in the field!

    • Gman, Is young infants and toddlers, all school age children? I know this sounds anal, but …. thanks c:)

      • Peter, O’Promter already blamed Bush earlier today. I would put in a (LOL), but sadly, it’s true.

        csm, All kids will be at risk if this takes off. Example: If someone sneezed on the handle of a grocery cart, and an infant touches the handle and then puts his/her hand in mouth, it’s possible to be infected with the flu.

        • Richmond Spitfire says:

          Hi G-Man,

          I have to know…In what way did BO blame Bush…I mean like, how could he possibly blame Bush for a “new and unusual” strain of Flu?

          Thanks,
          RS

          • esomhillgazette says:

            RS, How could the idiots of the Country blame Bush for Katrina? If they can do that, anything is possible.

    • Black Flag says:

      As I am the Dr. Gloom and Doom here, let me say this….

      …Keep your shirts on!….

      Come on! 40 supposed cases in the US… out of 300 million people!

      If we go bonkers over that and start claiming ‘pandemic’… God knows what may happen if people hear about the Measles – merely a few 100,000’s of cases~!~

      Every case of pandemics occurs when the hygiene of humanity is in disarray.

      The Spanish Flu hit the west …when???…. 1918. The devastation of War and its consequence on the returning very sick, unhygienic soldiers.

      TB pandemic hit the west….when???…1950’s with the returning of very sick, unhygienic soldiers returning from a global devastating war.

      The Black Plague hit the west…when??… during the Wars in the 14th Century around Constantinople, with the very sick, unhygienic soldiers returning from a devastating war.

      Whether its the Bird Flu, Swine Flu, or TB … look where it hits the heaviest – in the countries and parts of countries where hygiene has been compromised.

      Wash your hands regularly and take Vit. D.

      Otherwise, don’t fall into the hysteria.

      • USWeapon says:

        Well Said… Ignore the hysteria and wash your hands like normal. You will be fine.

        • A little off subject, but it looks like the Swine Flu is going to become the New Anthrax. I can only imagine the financial cost of this.

          I saw that China is thinking about not buying pork from the US. This after the poison baby milk and lead paint on toys.

          I can’t see a crisis like this going to waste.

      • I copied and pasted the W.H.O. website article on my blog last night. People are intelligent, I think that they can see that this is not a panic situation from what the W.H.O has to say.

        I choose to ignore the talking heads on TV because they purposefully try and make things sound worse just to get their ratings up.

      • I’m not concerned with the Swine Flu becoming a Pandemic. What scares me is what the “never waste a crisis” Obamanation is going to do with it, like Peter said. He don’ need no stinkin’ REAL reason to use it for his political gain! 😉

    • Maybe I heard wrong, but isn’t this flu suppose to be hitting the 25-45 age group hard, which is considered somewhat unusual?

      That is what the Spanish Flu did, in 1918, hit young healthy people.

      Years ago I read series of articles about the Spanish. The one thing I remember is that they said you got up in the morning, feeling fine. By lunch feeling a little ill, by supper….dead.

      Another point…we know the “source area” of this flu, but the government is not closing the border? Just seems to make sense, to close the door to the source, even if we already have some cases. Just leave the border open and let it flood in?

      • Black Flag says:

        Recall the state of the Nation in 1918.

        Flush toilets were rare. Out houses was the norm.

        Most people were rural and far from health services.

        Health services were in their infancy. Concepts of isolation and quarantine was new.

        The Spanish Flu wasn’t a fast killer – my Grandfather lost two sisters to it – both were nurses.

        Close the border:
        Certainly this can be done.

        Are you ready to suffer total economic collapse?

        How much are you willing to pay for a problem that has hit…40 people…

        More people died in a car accident since this morning than the TOTAL number of Flu.

        • I agree with you on the numbers, Black Flag.

          Now if the fatality rate was higher, there might be a reason for panic….

          The point I was making is that panic is not warranted, given the current situation, and that IF it was something really bad, would we “close the border”?

          If there are any “pathogen” experts in the house…does the “swine > avian > human” mix of this virus make sense, in the respect that it would occur naturally, in the wild, so to speak?

          • I am not a pathogen expert by any stretch of the imagination, however I do know that cross-contamination does occur in the wild, so to speak.

            Check out the W.H.O. website and see just how low key they are about this flu strain.

            MSM has to make the mundane sound like a panic situation in order to get their ratings up.

            • Yeah! GO MSM! Dumbasses. 🙂

              By the way. My GGGrandpa, and 1 son and 2 daughters lost to the 1918 Pandemic. Like BF says, that was another time.

              • What worries me is that the Spanish flu virus was resurrected, from an old grave, so it could be studied.
                That has implications that are obvious.

                Aside from that, I think there is more to the death rate from Spanish Flu than mere bad hygienic practices of the time:

                “Mice who had been infected with the full eight-gene 1918 recombinant virus rode the fast track to sickness and death. They outstripped the three other strains for the speed with which they fell sick, the high concentrations of virus in their blood and for their high mortality rate within five days.

                Within 24 hours of infection, four key foot-soldiers in the immune system went haywire, unleashing huge inflammation of the lungs, while genes that order cells to commit suicide, a process called apoptosis, were activated.

                Post-mortem analysis, carried out at various points during the experiment, showed the mice’s lungs were ravaged by a “massive” build up of fluid caused by haemorrhaging and bronchitis, while the lungs’ lining, the epithelium, was swiftly destroyed.”

                http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/694/deadly-secret-1918-flu-virus-unmasked

      • AND if thousands of people were to die, who is going to be left to pay for the Fuhrer’s agenda?

        • Let’s think about this Swine Flu for a minute. Now you have a virus that is a mix of pig, bird, and human flu; supposedly that first case came from a 4 year old Mexican boy that lives near a Hog factor. Now shot me if I am wrong but does this not sound like another manufactured disease? The cases are popping up everywhere and they are sporadic…genocide? What if??

  10. Black Flag says:

    Bush actually masterminded this and 9/11 is a conspiracy

    Bush, no – he isn’t smart enough. But neither are a bunch of guys living caves in Afghanistan.

    Conspiracy – obviously, yes it was.

    • Enlighten us…….

      • CWO2USNRet says:

        I expect he means ‘conspire’ in the literal sense. Al Qaeda conspired then planned and executed 9/11. Of course, as someone suggested, this could be an imposter BF.

    • Are you saying conspiracy from inside the United States? What would you have to back up a statement such as this. And you know I can’t accept a statement as simple as they aren’t smart enough.

      It didn’t take a giant brain to come up with the idea to hijack a bunch of planes and fly them into buildings. A bunch of guys living in caves in Afghanistan could absolutely come up with, and pull off, a plan like this. You know better than to assume that they don’t have guys in caves there just as smart as any of us. Believing otherwise would be like saying rednecks who hunt aren’t smart. And I know that you are smarter than to make that statement.

      I almost want to think someone hijacked the BlackFlag name…

    • Masterminds and money men weren’t/aren’t living in caves.

    • Richmond Spitfire says:

      Hi all,

      Richmond Spitfire is sitting here with her hands over her ears, chanting, “la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la”! In the spitting words of Jack Nicholson, “Richmond Spitfire, you can’t handle it”. 😦

      Well…ole Jack is right, “I can’t handle it”.

      I can’t handle the thought that an Agency such as the CIA or some other covert operation (US) would perpetrate this upon their own citizens. I don’t WANT to believe it; but in the spirit of trying to have an “open mind”, I look forward to this discussion if it moves further along… I’ll simply try to absorb what is said and ask legit questions if I don’t understand!

      Most likely (99%) certain, RS won’t believe it.

      Kindly,
      RS

      • RS, I’m not much on conspiracy theories. But I’m open-minded enough to know that anything is possible. Can a government murder it’s own citizens? Hitler did! Can our elected officials do harm to American citizens? You bet!

        G!

        • Richmond Spitfire says:

          Hey G-Man…

          I do see your point there…I cannot argue/ignore that logic.

          Was trying to be funny up in my orig post…Of course my hands aren’t literally over my ears…

          The thought is just too horrible to think about…but am reading…

          Regards,
          RS

      • Black Flag says:

        False Flags

        A regular strategy of government to provoke its population into supporting an otherwise very unpopular cause.

        Examples:
        FSB (ex-KGB) was behind the apartment bloc bombings that were carried out in Russia in September 1999

        “Operation Northwoods” was a US government plan to stage the assassination of civilians and blame it on Communist Cuba

        This particular operation was signed off by the CIA, Cabinet and the Joint Chiefs of Staff and only needed JFK to sign. He was appalled and this became one of the cornerstone reasons for him to attempt to disband the CIA.

        USS Liberty incident was a deliberate attack on a neutral United States Navy technical research ship, USS Liberty, by Israeli jet fighter planes and motor torpedo boats on June 8, 1967, during the Six-Day War.

        In the 1931 Mukden incident, Japanese officers fabricated a pretext for annexing Manchuria by blowing up a section of railway.

        August 1939, Reinhard Heydrich made use of fabricated evidence of a Polish attack against Germany to mobilize German public opinion and to fabricate a false justification for a war with Poland.

        On November 26, 1939 the Soviet Union shelled the Russian village of Mainila near the Finnish border. The Soviet Union attacked Finland four days after the Shelling of Mainila.

        So on and so forth….

        • I am glad you mentioned “Operation Northwoods”. I had read about that, and wondered if it was legit, or a crazy conspiracy story.

          I did notice back a few years ago when the flu vaccine was in shortage, that the reason was that it was contaminated with the “red bacteria”…and that it USED to be thought harmless, until the US government released it over a large California city and pneumonia case increased…the government did something similar in Hawaii.

          Makes a person wonder….

          • What?

            • Hi G.A.,

              If you asking me about the red bacteria:

              I was reading about the shortage of flu vaccine, because it was contaminated with the red bacteria and it had to be discarded, and there was not enough time to make more (it takes several months to process)…the company making it was in Great Britain, if I remember correctly.

              Anyway, mentioned casually (very casually, as if they were stating the obvious, like the sun comes up in the east) was the fact that it used to be thought that the red bacteria was harmless, until the US government released it over a large city and the pneumonia rates went up….that was back in the 50s or 60s. I looked it all up back when I read it, but didn’t keep the sites bookmarked.

    • Black Flag says:

      Bama Dad

      Exactly!

      USwep

      Look at just the facts, sir.

      The official explanation of entire event is so inconsistent in so many matters that it is utterly bizarre.

      I know its a hijack of this particular post – so I suggest perhaps a mini-post, one that a number of threads can be investigated and detailed over a long period of time – not merely 24 hours – to offer (as is my style) intelligent questions against the official story and to be “Sherlock Holmes” – “How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?”

      • esomhillgazette says:

        BF: I sir, do not believe that 9\11 was a conspiracy from the United States.

        However, having stated that, I do believe it could be POSSIBLE!

        And that scares me more than I can convey with mere words.

      • BF,

        Are you saying that those who perpetrated the 9/11 attack were actually assisted by our government with the intent to further the socialist takeover of these United States?

        Shirley, you jest!

        Yes, those attackers HAD to have a government backing of some sort – BUT NOT OURS! That sort of planning and preparation had to have some sort of diplomatic backing and financing on a national scale, and that nation just happened to be the Taliban controlled Afghanistan that the United States helped remove the Soviets from their soil some fifteen years before – THAT was their way of saying thank you to the evil satan America. Nothing more, nothing less.

      • Black Flag says:

        GA

        So let’s start with motives.

        OB’s stated goal was to disengage the USA from the regions; that is, send the USA home. Get out of the Middle East physically (remove our troops) and politically (overt, one-sided, support of Israel vs. Palestine).

        Every one of his assaults on American had these in common:
        1) military and political targets
        2) within the region

        So,
        – Beirut Marine barracks bombing (check 1 and 2)
        – Kenya and Tanzanian Embassy (check 1 and 2)
        – USS Cole (check 1 and 2)

        9/11?? No check 1 and no check 2 … completely out of character. This makes no sense for him.

        He has no capacity outside of his region – which is why he only acted within the region. He also knows that US civilian deaths would provoke US action – whereas US political and military deaths are more acceptable, yet achieve results (see Somalia).

        He would not attack outside his region and would not attack civilians direclty.

        9/11 would make no sense to him.

        Next, he is very smart – and incredibly strategically wise.

        GA, you know the United States and its mentality. So, think carefully here.

        If you want the US to go home, would you purposely provoke it by attacking its home?

        Nearly every person who has two brain cells would know that attacking the US on her territory would not cause America to go home, but cause America to fully engage.

        OB does not want more US engagement, he wanted less.

        He would know attacking US on home soil would be exactly opposite of his intention.

        For anyone whose goal is to disengage American interests, it would be the most monumental strategic blunder to attack USA on her territory. He did not survive the Soviet invasion by making blunders.

        Further, go the FBI Most Wanted Web Site for Bin Laden.

        http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm

        Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world

        Do you notice something missing?

        Why would the FBI not attribute 9/11 to him in their reason for apprehension? If the deaths of 200 foreigners was notable for mention, why did the FBI not note the 3,000 deaths of 911?

        Because they have no evidence that he was involved….

        So the age old question – Qui Bono – Who benefits?

        Who benefits from a fully engaged America in the Middle East?

        Certainly not the Iraqis, Hindustanis, OB, or Palestinians.

        So who does?

        • Black Flag says:

          Hindustanis

          What the heck??? Darn auto-spell check…

          Afghans is what I wanted there….

          • Calf Roper says:

            How do you explain OB then taking credit for 9/11 in the videos? Fakes or was it more of a strategy on his part. Something like, “I didn’t do this, but the Americans will now come anyway so I should at least take credit for it and solidify my own base over here”??

            • Our government but Mr. bin Laden in power…just think about that. They have these video tapes, intelligence, ect, yet Saddam Hussien is dead while Mr. Bin Liden continues on with his life…coincident?!

          • Black Flag says:

            He did not take credit at all.

            The only verified interview has him admitting to the Embassy bombings and the Cole bombings.

            He denies any involvement in 9/11.

            He did say “When your enemy breaks his legs, you rejoice. I did not break my enemies legs, but I rejoice”

            • Calf Roper says:

              I did not know that. I learn something new every day. That is extremely interesting then.

        • Richmond Spitfire says:

          Hi Black Flag,

          Just asking here, but….What about the possibility of mental illness or Fanaticalism (sp?) characteristics? I mean, if present, wouldn’t these characteristics possibly overcome logic, sound reasoning, upholding a strategy, etc?

          Thanks,
          RS

        • Black Flag says:

          Improbable.

          He is a fanatic – true, but a long-lived fanatic.

          He successfully battled the Russians; his planning in the past has been nearly flawless in his past adventures.

          He does not let his emotions override his planning. He is/was not one to react impulsively.

          He has dealt, intimately, with US government operations militarily and financially. He knows the USA materially and intellectually and philosophically.

          He would know, just like you knew, that any attack on US directly would provoke maximum response.

          So, knowing this, what goal would be accomplished by pushing this button?

          His goal was to disengage – why hit the engage button, then?

          • USWeapon says:

            Again the premise was false. And let’s not attribute too much of battling the Russians in Afghanistan to him. He was a bit player at that point, loyal to the mujahideen. His rise to prominence was after that conflict.

          • Black Flag says:

            So your premise is that OB actually wanted a fully engaged America in the Middle East?

            Doesn’t that contradict his goals of the US out of the Middle East?

        • BF, That, sir, is the best example I have ever heard to support any conspiracy theory about 9/11. Kudos to you!!

          G!

        • Black Flag says:

          And, CF, why don’t you ask the FBI why they don’t attribute 9/11 to him?

          I guess they don’t put too much credibility in those vidoes….

        • IMF?

        • Bama dad says:

          BF

          According to bin Laden’s 1998 fatwa (religious decree), it is the duty of Muslims around the world to wage holy war on the U.S., American citizens, and Jews. Muslims who do not heed this call are declared apostates (people who have forsaken their faith”

          Should there not be: 3) kill Americans
          This was what 9/11 was all about-kill. Or am I uniformed.

        • CWO2USNRet says:

          BF, your whole argument is based on the idea OBL wanted the US to disengage from the Middle East. He may have stated that as his goal but perhaps it’s merely subterfuge. After all, the jihadi goal is a global caliphate.

          What’s more he gained a lot of street cred and many thousands of willing martyrs. In the short term he is hurt by being driven underground and having his structure and financing attacked. However, the successful blow against the Great Satan helped his ideological cause significantly. The jihad is about patience and the long term.

          If OBL was in fact willing to trade the short term pain for the long term gain then your premise is false.

          Signing off for now.

        • USWeapon says:

          Interesting argument, but your initial premise at the beginning was incorrect so therefore the entire argument flowing from that is incorrect as well. I will offer up an article on this on Tuesday night. That will give us the platform to follow the trail as you suggested to MadMom. I will warn you though, I am going to be tough to debate on this one. I spent a lot of time in that region and I have studied Al Qaeda and Bin Laden extensively.

        • BF,

          If you ACTUALLY believe what you are implying here . . . . Run, do not walk, and above all do not operate a motor vehicle in your present mental state, to your nearest mental health facility.

          You gotta be joking.

          You just gotta.

          • Unfortunately there is a lot of truth to BF madness GA. Take a look at the eveidence and decide for yourself…We have a bigger enemy on the lose and its not the Taliban or Al Quada…its the US Government!

      • BF, I have done the research and I believe as you believe. People dismiss and discredit because of the unknown but I actually read a book called The Spell of Levithan 666 back in 2000 which was a collabration of what people would call Conspiracy Theories and mind you, this book talked about the Trade Center being blowed up and then in 2001 it happened…so I know that there are lies flying around and the truth is being buried. So BF, you are on point and believe me, I always do research before I dismiss anything.

  11. I'm learning! says:

    Speaking of environmental issues – I came across something last summer that really got me thinking. As I stated in my first posting on this site, I never paid much attention to political issues until a few months ago. I falsely thought that no one can be an expert on everything, so I will focus on what I know and let others focus on what they know. However, I have since decided that I can still learn! May not be an expert, but knowledge certainly didn’t hurt anyone!

    I have seen people say on this site that they don’t believe in conspiracy theories. I didn’t either – and still don’t in all cases, but I watched a video – sent to me by family in Alaska – who commented that they have heard things off and on over the years that support what this man says, and found that much of what he says makes sense. Now, maybe I have been reading too much David Baldacci fiction lately, but I think there are some conspiracy’s going on that we just don’t have a clue about.

    This is the link that was sent to me nearly a year ago: However, when I tried to run it a little bit ago, it didn’t seem to work. I don’t know if I was having a bad computer moment or if it no longer works. So I am posting this one just in case you can make it work, because his entire speech is on this link. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3340274697167011147

    But, if you just search Lindsey Williams. He wrote a book called the energy non-crisis. I found parts of this video on you tube and if you look hard enough, we probably would the rest of it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbakN7SLdbk He saw things as a Chaplin for the oil pipeline companies in Alaska in the 70’s that are shocking. He basically tells us that we have crude oil literally bubbling out of the ground in the north slope of Alaska – they are literally forcing it back into the ground to protect the environment. (I wonder how much tax they could impose on cap & trade for doing that?) They are sure we easily have a 200 year supply of oil for America there.

    Anyway, like I said, I am new to having political views. Is anyone familiar with him or this video? I am curious on your thoughts. I found this to be something that started to change my attitude on ignoring politics.

    • Alright, had a lot of things to do so put your first link on as background noise (it worked, by the way). Riveting, scary, outlandish, and on and on. Don’t have time to do any more research at the moment, but am interested in hearing from others that listen to it. If this is true, I’m amazed this guy is still alive!

    • esomhillgazette says:

      That was a very interesting and thought provoking video. I do not see how it will ever come to light though. The Environmentalists in power now will never let it be done.

      • I'm learning! says:

        Maybe, but if Scientists can be kept quiet on the truths about carbon, if there is enough at stake, a solid attempt could be made to keep this quiet too. The north slope isn’t exactly a weekend hiking trip around some state or national park. It would be a challenge to get there.

        The person I got this from knows the company that built a bridge across the Yukon for the pipelines. It was built to hold 5, it is currently holding 1. Why did they overestimate the size of the bridge by that much?

        China owns a lot of our debt, but they are not the only one. It would explain why we certainly haven’t reduced our dependency on foreign oil over the past 30 – 40 years. Smoke and mirrors – keep the environmentalists busy worrying about the possibility of drilling offshore (which won’t happen in this administration), combating pollution, or fighting the creators of too much carbon – whatever other environmental issues is in the spotlight for that time frame. Unless that area of the artic circle suddenly starts to “melt” they are focused on other things.

    • Black Flag says:

      We have so much oil … hundreds of years of the stuff at modern extraction techniques….

      The universe is full of oil – Neptune has more methane in its atmosphere than the Earth has Co2 as does Uranus.

      There are moons of Jupiter where it rains – yes rains – oil.

      It’s everywhere….

      • That is a good point. I work in the Offshore oil and gas industry in the Gulf of Mexico. Oil is relatively cheap right now, so there;s not a lot of new exploration happening.

        The people in Florida and California have resources they don’t want to explore due to concerns about tourism. Tourists need to use some kind of fuel to get there. Hello???

        We don’t want windmills in the desert because they hurt the beauty of the desert? Also not where the Kennedy’s have to look at the “eyesore”.

        Nuclear power is very safe but there is the argument like for prisons, “Not in My back yard”?

        This is the US “Zero-Growth” Energy Policy you may have seen me comment on in the past.

        The small area of ANWR the oil companies want to use is 1/10 of 1% of the whole area.

        I guess my point is that, there are resources available but someone doesn’t want to use them. Libs always want to punish the oil companies but the Pharmaceutical companies get away with murder.

        What is the solution?

    • Saudi Arabia will be running out of oil within 20 yrs. and other oil countries may be on the same time frame. The increase of our society to consume oil is depleting the resources at a faster pace, especially with China, India and other countries with productions and cars.

      It’s possible the oil barons/elites want to delay/reserve the U.S. oil fields with this knowledge. Once the Middle East has depleted all their oil, they can then switch to the U.S./Canada reserves.
      The increase of worldwide populations also places a strain on the demand of more oil.

      The lack of new refineries has its purpose in their scheme.

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        “Saudi Arabia will be running out of oil within 20 yrs. and other oil countries may be on the same time frame. The increase of our society to consume oil is depleting the resources at a faster pace, especially with China, India and other countries with productions and cars.”

        Recent studies have shown that the oil fields in Saudi Arabia are replenishing as fast as they can pump the stuff out, and some of the oil fields are, in fact, expanding.

        There ain’t no shortage of the stuff at all, nor will there be for quite some time.

      • I think Truman had this strategy, use up everyone else’s oil then have a monopoly.

  12. Black Flag says:

    Madmom

    I guess my question is “Why?” Why the ever increasing power grabs of an ever larger government, advocated for by political leaders across the spectrum? Is it to gain more power? Is it to “grow” their business, much like a private business owner seeks to grow theirs?…..We have to ascertain the motivations which drive our government further and further from the core principles espoused in the Constitution before we try to right the ship. In other words, we have to diagnose the disease. Then we can come up with a game plan to try and cure it.

    Well, now you’ve let the cat out of the bag.

    You’ve asked the First Question of Universe – “why” –

    To approach the answer, we have to work factor the equation to its parts.

    The theory of science and discovery is to take a complex ‘thing’ and continuously break it down to simpler and simpler components and achieve good understanding at a simple level, and then slowly increase the complexity as we recombine – because in many instances, the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

    We must do the same with government.

    Government is not merely an example of human organization.

    We do not confuse the Rotary Club with Dept. of Defense. So there must be something more to government at its essence.

    We see that government’s only tool is compulsion and violence. It forces us by the use of or threat of violence to obey it.

    Most of the People believe that as long as the demand of obedience is on matters that are ‘moral’ or ‘right’, we see no conflict in giving our obedience to government. Therefore, we accept violence in the enforcement moral behavior.

    Now, this is where 98% of the people stop their thinking. The assumption is that as soon as someone declares some actions is ‘right’ or ‘moral’ or ‘fair’ or ‘just’ … it is!

    Those who seek evil power and are intelligent will quickly come to understand that they can seize power from the people on the basis of merely claiming their actions are moral.

    Rarely are such claims investigated beyond a mere superficial review. Quickly, evil accumulates power – claiming legitimacy in its actions by mere declaration of morality, and exercises its violence upon the people on more and more matters.

    And it is here that the evils of government proliferate. Without a concrete understanding of the implications of these subjective moral declarations, great evil is done with the best of intentions of the People.

    The question should continue to: What constitutes moral behavior?

    The roots of many discussions here on the blog revolves around this question – however, one quickly finds that moral behavior definitions are wholly subjective and personal, and very hard to justify worthy enough to be forced upon another person.

    After enough kicking the idea of morals around, you’ll probably find their is only one universally justified moral worthy of using violence against to enforce it and that is …..prohibition on the use of violence.

    No person has the right to initiate violence upon another person.

    So, now we have the great paradox of the People.

    The People create an entity whose only tool is violence … to enforce morals … of which the only universally enforceable moral is the prohibition of violence. A tool of violence to stop violence.

    But people being people, many don’t like some of the other people’s non-violent behavior that disgusts them.

    They believe they have the right to use violence to correct bad behavior.

    But of course, as soon as you extend the use of violence to enforce behavior they subjectively believe is better than the others, they break the universal moral of prohibition of violence.

    And now we have a contradiction – break the universal moral to enforce a subjective moral.

    And you know my theory of contradictions…. as soon as one tries to make real a contradiction, evil exists.

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      Yes this is indeed a paradox. You see, daddy used to be able to spank you for behaving like an idiot, but now if daddy does that it is child abuse. However, if the government tazers, shoots, or imprisions you for behaving like an idiot (by government standards) then that is of course ok.

      What daddy thought was good and pure put daddy in jail. The fact that daddy couldn’t teach you right from wrong put you in jail.

      Pretty soon if we all don’t agree with what the government is doing, we will all be in jail.

      The government is also busy trying to convince us that many of the things that we thought of in the past as “wrong” or “immoral” are now just fine and dandy; and many of the things we formerly thought of as “just”, “good” and “moral” are actually things which should be actively thought of as “close-minded” or “wrong”

      This furtherance of moral confusion lets evil spread even more quickly, because it is tougher to recognize what is actually evil through all of the fog. It might LOOK evil, but that might have been by yesterday’s definition, so maybe it is actually good now… not really sure…

      • esomhillgazette says:

        Before I will allow my children to run wild and do as they please, I will just have to back up with my hands behind my back for the fitting of the handcuffs. Because I Love them too much to watch them become hoodlums.

        My friend’s Grandma used to say: (Do not take literally) “You’re born with your brains in your behind, and they’ve got to be beat up into your head!”) 😀

        I try to follow that logic when raising mine. It was surely true when I was a youngun’.

        • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

          My friend’s dad used to say, “There is a direct connection between your butt and your brain called the spinal cord. Sometimes pain signals sent up this connection are the only things a kid will understand.”

        • Bama dad says:

          Esom

          As my good mother used to say to family and friends: If I didn’t whip that boy (me) at least once a day, it was because he was sick.

      • Beautifully stated!

    • Black Flag says:

      I have never found the need to spank my daughter.

      • esomhillgazette says:

        Yeah well BF, you didn’t have me or either one of mine for kids or you would have “whooped the tar” out of them! 😀

      • USWeapon says:

        I have also never had to hit my son, but then again everyone who knows me will tell you that I have a look that let’s you know what is about to come. He has, in 15 years, never decided to test that look. LOL

        • esomhillgazette says:

          US, I do wish I had that look. But apparently I don’t. My boys are too much like me anyway. I did things as a kid knowing full well what the consequences were for getting caught, and even doing things knowing I would get caught. I never got 1 single whippin’ I did not RICHLY deserve.

          All joking aside, I was not abused, I was disciplined with a hickory switch. And it never got out of hand. Every kid around me including all the kids in my extended family were whopped too. It was just the way things were.

          I have had occasion to whoop my boys, but not near as much as I got them. I think it’s a case of different raising in different places, that’s all. From what I know of you in your writing, I’m quite sure your son doesn’t test you. Mine are very mule-headed. They get that from me. ;_)

          • USWeapon says:

            LOL… Don’t get me wrong. I don’t have a problem with parents whippin their children when it is needed. In fact, perhaps more of that needs to happen these days. I am fortunate that my son is the way he is. I was beaten daily when I was kid. And it was abuse (oddly I didn’t grow up twisted enough to use that as an excuse for something). But boy there were some of those beatings that I richly deserved.

            I don’t judge how a parent raises their children so long as they are teaching them to be good people, work hard, show respect, etc… So please don’t think for a second I was criticizing you or anyone else. That certainly was not my intention.

            • Spare the rod, spoil the child…I am a firm believer in spanking. I have a 3 year old and she gets popped on the leg from time to time if she gets out of hand. I talk, I count, and then I spank. She has 2 chances to get it right. Afterwards…she gets “pow-pow”…that is what we call it.

      • Neither have I ever felt the need to spank my son or my daughter, now aged 11 and 14, and I am frequently complimented on how polite and well behaved they are. They have boundaries, they know them, and they are aware that there are consequences to one’s actions.

    • Black Flag says:

      But, anyway, the government is not Daddy, and “knows best”.

      The point is, the contradiction.

      Pervert the universal moral to enforce a subjective moral gives rise to the ever-increasing power of government over the lives of the People.

      • Calf Roper says:

        There is one universal moral force that nullifies the contradiction though – God and his Word. I don’t mean to get all religious on you here, but God did define a moral set of truths that an individual can choose to take in order to not live their life in a perpetual contradiction.

        Thou shalt not kill.
        Thou shalt not covet.
        Thou shalt not steal.
        Thou shalt not commit adultery.
        etc, etc.

        Even if you are a professed atheist, you have to admit that God’s moral law does not contradict, does not give ground, does not change.

        The United States was founded based on natural law and every individual’s God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit. Not Government-given rights to these, which Government would have you believe today.

        I would venture that a return to God’s moral law would set our country back on a better path of absolutes.

      • Black Flag says:

        Theologically….

        I believe you would admit God created everything.

        I believe you would admit God is perfectly Good.

        I believe you would admit God purposely created everything – that is, Perfect Intelligence.

        Therefore, if evil exists, God purposely created evil.

        Purposeful creation of evil is an act of evil.

        Evil is opposite of Good.

        One cannot be Perfectly Good and act with evil.

        Therefore, Theologically,

        God does not exist…..

        OR…..

        You incorrectly attribute morals to God.

        If a person’s head is crushed by a rock …..

        ….falling from a mountain, do you attribute this as an act of evil? I doubt it.

        If a person’s head is crushed by a rock…..

        ….from a blow of a hand of another person, you would attribute this as an act of evil.

        But what difference is it? It is only the hand of MAN…that makes the difference.

        Humans define morals, not God

        Attributing morals to God is like drawing with a white crayon on a white wall – it cannot be seen.

        God has no need for religion or morals

        • Black Flag says:

          ..but it appears humans do…

        • Calf Roper says:

          You’re forgetting “choice”. Yes, I believe God created everything. But he then gave his creation “free will”. This “free will” and “choice” has led to Man either following God’s way or not following it.

          Leaving out “good” and “evil” entirely, one path leads to “contradiction” and the other leads to an “absolute”.

          I can choose to do whatever I want, be it “evil” or “good”.

          • Kristian says:

            Great minds, huh Calf? LOL

          • Black Flag says:

            Correct.

            YOU, that is a MAN, chooses good or evil.

            God couldn’t care less.

            • So you’re saying that Man established moral laws such as “Thou shalt not kill” in order to bring some order to civilization?

              In that case, then killing anyone at anytime would not be morally wrong – only a contradiction.

        • Kristian says:

          BF,

          I have to respectfully disagree with you. God did not create evil, but by giving man free will came evil. That is not a contradiction of the universe. Evil is a choice and it is up to man whether he chooses evil or not.

          • Black Flag says:

            I’m not sure what you are disagreeing with….

            …morals are a creation of Man… which is what I think you just said, too!

            Evil, from the POV of God, would be a contradiction to the Universe, since the Universe absolutely crushes any contradiction in reality.

            Any attempt to make real a contradiction would be in direct conflict to the absolute nature of the universe, IE: God.

  13. Hi everyone . . .

    Time for me to throw a monkey wrench into the fire . . .

    Unlike Black Flag, I can think of no solution to the problem of big government and this march toward (and this is MY word invention of the century) “FASCIOLISM” – meaning the combining of fascism and socialism – that is not simple. We do not need to mire the solution in the mud of the problem in order to clean the machinery. All Marines are trained infantrymen. All infantrymen know that they cannot clean their rifles by bathing them in mud. First you have to get out of the mud. Simple enough.

    In this case; MUD = POLITICAL PARTY

    Yes, I know, here I go again. If nothing else I AM consistent.

    Get our political system out of the political party mode and force the individual to run on his/her own merits and NOT that of a bunch of old cronies who have nothing but their own hidden agenda in mind.

    For all you conspiracy minded folks – and that includes you BF – look at it this way; How would you go about subverting a country that was set up in such a way that its citizens had total control of the government?

    Answer; You first invade its political parties to gradually change the PLATFORMS those parties stand on.

    Next question; How do you stop that progression from reaching its ultimate goal of subverting that nation and showing the rest of the world that resistance is futile?(Yes, I am a science fiction nut)

    Answer; GET RID OF THE POLITICAL PARTY SYSTEM!

    Moral of this story? George Washington was right!

    You see, if there ever was a VLDG I could not go along with it just for that reason – its just another political party. If USW or Mad Mom or BF or JAC or LOI were to run on their own merits and not on a party platform . . . Well then I could really look at the individual instead of the individual being a smokescreen like Obama was for the last two years. Everyone voted for the smokescreen and got the FASCIOLISM agenda as a result. What no one ever considered was that Obama was telling everyone that he and only he represented “Hope & Change” and not telling them that once elected he would be doing whatever his party platform dictated for him to do.

    My contention is that there was only one President that this nation has ever had that did not have a party platform to abide by . . . and that President was George Washington, our first. All that followed had a party platform agenda to follow, and that means that they were elected falsely on their own merits and then gave us the party platform – most of which is hidden from the voters.

    The trick has always been to con the voters to vote for someone who is an iconical figure that seems almost larger than life – FDR, JFK, etc, etc. Then when someone comes along that will actually upset the applecart – Goldwater for instance – you play the nuclear war card, the race card, the whatever card to scare the general population away from that individual. Yes, there was always some who came along that pulled some bonehead stunt on their own that eliminated themselves from the equation(that word was just for BF) like Nixon, and that guy that talked for three or four hours in freezing weather and died of pneumonia a short time later(how soon we forget the dumber than dumb ones).

    Get rid of the political party system and we then can get a handle on this country and return it to the freedom loving and secure nation that our founders intended it to be.

    Well, anyway, that is just my humble opinion. 🙂

    • Black Flag says:

      Sir,

      I am not against action, however, I’m no fan of futile action.

      And to be even more clear, if given a choice between only two paths – (1)Political Party-ism and (2)Individual Political Activism, as the latter degrades the centralization of power, I would support (2) against (1).

      If given, then, a further choice between only two paths – (1)VLDG and (2)Individual Political Activism, as the former degrades the centralization of power, I would support (1) against (2).

      If, then, given a choice between only two paths – (1)No Government and (2)VLDG, as the former degrades the centralization of power, I would support (1) against (2).

      Bet you can see a pattern…. 😉

      However, there does not exist merely two choices…..

      My continuing retort to you remains:

      What moral basis do you claim to enable you to inflict violence upon non-violence people?

      Until you answer that, as an infantry man, you are simply moving from one mud hole right into another……

      • Bama dad says:

        “What moral basis do you claim to enable you to inflict violence upon non-violence people?”

        Well maybe there are no non-violence people.

        Take 10 people and throw them in a pit with food and water for 5, then see what happens. If there is no order or a system to keep order all you would have is 9 dead people. There needs to be some code or system to insure order. If not, only the strongest will survive.

      • Black Flag says:

        People required to be non-violent is not the question.

        Freedom does not stop crime or evil.

        But as long as you agree by consent that evil be done in your name, evil shall be turned to good and be done in your name.

        Certainly you describe savagery – and the rules of savages prevail.

        One hopes, however, you are civilized, and the support the rules of civilization so that they prevail.

        It is your choice:
        Savages or Civilized. You cannot have both.

        • Say BF, isn’t that what Anarchy is? Savagery civilized or civilized savagery, I seem to have a problem discerning which is which.

          • Black Flag says:

            You have a problem with the word “Anarchy”.

            So let’s try…Liberarchy.

            And joining two contrary adjectives together does not create an argument.

            • “Liberarchy”

              Wasn’t he a piano player?

              “And joining two contrary adjectives together does not create an argument.”

              Sounded like a good argument to me 😉

    • CWO2USNRet says:

      GA, take a look at GOOOH.com. The individuals run on their own merit with no party affiliation. The candidates are only beholden to vote their own beliefs as expressed during the campaign via the candidate questionnaire.

      • Black Flag says:

        Yet, there is no obligation for them to actually do what they say.

        • CWO2USNRet says:

          I had the same misgiving. A couple of points to consider: First, as Amazed1 said, a non-professional politician in this circumstance is likely to be pointedly honest; second, a successfully elected candidate is bound by some form of contract to vote iaw the positions expressed in the questionnaire. How this would be practically enforced I’m not sure. But, since terms are only two years an isolated rogue could do very little damage before being voted out.

      • BF is right there. So how would we control them? Impeachment would take so long that the damage would almost be irreversible. Kinda like what is happening now?

        • GA….why should we control them…are you suggesting there are no humans left that are honorable enough to hold true to their word? In that case BF’s plan would never work either….in which case we are doomed.

  14. esomhillgazette says:

    OK! OK! I am NOT a Conspiracy Theorist and don’t want to turn into one! But 2 or 3 of you have started me thinking. Me thinking is a dangerous proposition since I ain’t got the equipment for it! Thus we have the rest of this:

    What I am worried about now is that you may be right. BF makes good points and after going to the True Patriot’s Site at the very top of this comment line, I have to say he does too. I don’t want to believe that someone or several someones are behind the scenes playing with us like puppets on strings but it’s possible under these conditions and a few others.

    1. They would have to have deep, deep, pockets.

    2. They would have to be very powerful in a cloak and dagger kind of way.

    3. This wouldn’t have been the first time they have changed our direction through manipulation, and won’t be the last.

    4. They have spent not only a buttload of money, but also a buttload of time on this. Probably more than one Generation.

    And finally: Why?

    To make one world government? To be King of the world? Or just to be the most defacto powerful person in the world? Oh, I can believe that someone is pulling Obama’s strings. I can even believe someone pulled Bush’s strings. For that matter the entire US’s. But the whole World?

    Because I certainly don’t believe a group powerful enough to pull America’s strings wouldn’t in turn be able to do the same to the rest of the World’s governments also. I also would tend to believe that the most likely suspects to pull this off would be a Financial group. Like Bankers or maybe Super-Industrialists.

    Now I’m starting to sound like a 007 movie, I know. But I did say it was dangerous to get me to thinking, and you did it anyway. I don’t really believe any of this. It’s just too fantastic for belief. But if it were to be true, then there is no hope for America no matter what we do. And that would be more than I could bear. So I’m going to choose to NOT believe it for now. Or at least I’m going to try.

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      Well, the so-called Federal Reserve Bank is controlled by the same families that control all of the Megabanks in Europe, and even though the Federal Reserve is actually unconstitutional, it basically has the power to set monitary/economic/fiscal policy for the US Government, so….

      Woodrow Wilson basically realized that he had screwed the pooch when it came to the creation of the Federal Reserve, but he realized it too late.

      The United States had the power to print our own money as a soverign nation. Wilson gave up that power, and instead gave a central bank the power to print the money and then lend it to the Government to use. In return for this service, the Government would then owe the principal back to the Federal Reserve Bank, along with any interest due. Hence the reason for the terms National Deficit and National Debt, and the interest due on the National Debt.

      My question is, who benefits from the US paying interest to the Federal Reserve when the US could have simply retained its own authority to print money?

      Sorry to say that your conspiracy theory is more likely to be true than false, but I just had to point that out.

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        http://www.save-a-patriot.org/files/view/whofed.html

        The charts on here are pretty confusing, but you should get the general idea. A few select banks and families own the Federal Reserve, the big banks in London and the rest of Western Europe, and most of the big multi-national corporations.

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        Oh yeah, and this one too…
        http://batr.org/markets/federalreserve.html

        It poses a very good question… why would the government give up the power to print money and instead agree to pay interest to a bank in exchange for the priveledge of being allowed to borrow money from the bank?

        This link is a lot easier to read and follow than the other one (though both are very interesting), and this link has a great Thomas Jefferson quote in it.

        The more I study US History the more I like old TJ and the more I think he has probably been rolling in his grave for QUITE some time now….

      • esomhillgazette says:

        Dang it Peter! I want somebody to tell me I’m being crazy and stupid, not probably right! 😉

        • USWeapon says:

          You are being crazy and stupid, EHG. 😉

          • Oh Thank You US!!! 😀

            You know seriously US, I went to the website Peter gives and that would probably make a good article too. I’m going to back there tomorrow and look farther

        • Yeah…its hard to swallow and that is why I continue to say “prepare”. There is nothing we can do but slow the agenda down but we are destined…Goes back to BF and others dicussion about good, evil, and God.

      • Peter:

        This is exactly the point I have been trying to make about the Fed Reserve bank all along. BF has as well.

        Caution though, the families that owned the Fed Banks way back when don’t necessarily own or even control today. But, the people who run those banks are second, third and fourth generation managers who have been raised in the culture and system.

        By the way, The Federal Reserve Bank is not unconstitutional, per the scholars I have discussed this with. Congress established it several times.

        There was a time when all the major central banks in the world were owned or controlled by only a handful of banking families. This has changed as generations dilute control, much like later generations wasting the fortunes they inhereted from their grandparents. There are connections and there is a very big spider web to figure out. I just wanted to caution against swallowing hook line and sinker some of the stuff running around on this topic.

        I have some DVD’s, two, that run about 3 hours long that show the whole history of the Fed and the various, nefarious activities they might have been involved in. It is quite an eye opener. If anyone is interested give USW a PO or other mail address you feel comfortable with and I’ll send you a copy.

        Best Wishes, and I hope ya all can sleep tonight after all this.
        JAC

        • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

          “By the way, The Federal Reserve Bank is not unconstitutional, per the scholars I have discussed this with. Congress established it several times.”

          Congress establishes unconstitutional crap all the time. Just because Congress established the Federal Reserve system several times does not automatically make it Constitutional.

          Why would the US Government willingly giving up its own right to print currency and agreeing to pay interest to a Federal Reserve Bank in exchange for the priveledge of being able to use the Bank’s currency be considered legitimate under the Constitution?

    • USWeapon says:

      I just don’t buy that whole conspiracy thinking line. Someone powerful enough to pull this off would be able to do it without anyone ever even seeing any connections. I have yet to see a group that doesn’t have a defector at some point, yet we have never seen anyone claim to know of such a plot. And I highly doubt that this would be because they are better at killing defectors than other folks.

      • Black Flag says:

        Sir,

        You are perfectly aware of devotion to duty.

        You would act upon orders, doing your duty, without any knowledge of why or what for such orders were given.

        If you were ordered to secrecy, you would do your duty.

        A Director of the CIA described exactly how such a broad conspiricy is easily possible, based on his own experience.

        When he was an CIA agent, he received a call one evening from his Director. The Director told him that some General was going to give him a call, and he was to obey what ever order the General gave him. The Director said he did not know anything about what the General needed, other than it was Top Secret and of the utmost priority of National Security.

        A few minutes later the General called, telling him a courier was delivering an envelope with Top Secert contents. The General had no idea what the matter was about, but it was a National Priority.

        A few minutes later, a Captain appeared at his door, with a package. He signed for the package and the Captain left.

        Inside was an order for him to divert a commercial airline to overfly a particular location for photographs. Nothing about what was important or what the photos were about.

        He called his contacts who diverted the airline.

        He got a medal for this work, as it resolved some, unspoken and unknown, National Security issue.

        As he said, he cannot prove the voice on the phone was his Director; he never met the General before, or after the event; he never saw the Captain before or since. He did his duty.

      • I’m totally with you, USW, in regards to 9/11. Look at the situation from the point of view of a physician. The first thing they teach in medical school is if you hear a whinny, think horse, not zebra. Everyone wants to think zebra. It’s exciting to think zebra. But 99.9% of the time, it’s just a horse.

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        My father had a friend who claims to have purchased a desk from a Masonic Lodge back in 1974. In this desk, my father’s friend claims to have found a chart of the movement of the stock market. The dates on the chart of the movement of the stock market went from 1890 to 2050.

        My father claims that the document clearly showed the run-up in the stock market in the mid 1990s followed by the dot-com bubble burst in 1999-2000 followed by another bubble-burst in the 2008-2010 period.

        I have not personally seen this chart, nor has its source been evaluated or verified in any way that I know of.

        However, if it is true that this chart exists, the whole Illuminati thing seems more plausible.

        Anyway, my father claims that the story of this stock market chart is true.

        Supposedly the Pyramid with the All-Seeing-Eye (or Eye of Providence) and the inscription “Annuit Coeptis Novus Ordo Seclorum” can be translated as “Divine Providence Favors a New World Order”

    • Well…

      You can google “Illuminati”

      ….I’m not saying I believe this stuff, I have seen TV programs about the possibility.

      I like the idea of having a thread just to research and evaluate various conspiracy theories, looking forward to it:)

    • Me thinks…some people think way to much…..some of this is way to overboard. Yes there are things that go on in our government….Bay of pigs anyone? But the truth is you just have to be willing to accept truth when confronted with it. Looking for a conspiracy when there is none is a waste of time.

    • The Federal Reserve is a privately owned corporation whose affiliation are connected to the European Banks, headed by David Rockefeller. List of Key Members:
      http://newsfromthewest.blogspot.com/2008/05/who-owns-federal-reserve.html

      http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200905/imf-advice

  15. RWBoveroux says:

    G-Man:

    Are you saying the solution to this counry’s problems is to talk about them? Respectfully, what about turning that talk into action?

    VR
    RWB

    I moved this down here to continue the discussion…USW

    • USWeapon says:

      RWB,

      I think that short of an armed revolt there is little action that can take place, and I don’t know that an armed revolt is the answer. We do need to discuss this with EVRYONE. Education is our greatest tool at this point. There are tons of things we can come up with the spread the message and spread the knowledge about what is really happening. But until over half of America gets on baord with the message, there are very few options for action.

      • Black Flag says:

        Armed revolt will only ensure the continuation of tyranny under another banner.

        Withdrawal of consent will shift government from legitimacy into common criminals, and then can be dealt with accordingly.

      • One option, USW, is (and I know that I am sounding like a broken record here) that we the people en mass demand an end to the political party system. Removing that tool from the box will essentially cripple the movement toward socialism/fascism(since no one appreciates MY new word).

        The idea is to slow it down enough so that the great majority of the general public will be able to see what is happenning. THEN if that is what they want, nothing we or anyone else can say or do will stop it. Then it will be time for those of us here to find another planet to move to.

        • USWeapon says:

          I don’t mind you sounding like a broken record (although be careful with that term, the young’uns don’t know what a broken record sounds like, lol). I think your idea has merit and I am willing to discuss it further. I am unsure if it is even possible, but I like the idea of it. As I said on your guest post commentary, I have some concerns with practicality, but I am willing to concede it may be crazy enough to work 🙂

          And I, for one, fully appreciated your word.

        • I appreciate your new word, GA, because that’ s exactly what we are faced with. This ain’t no happy shiny Swedish style socialism. And it’s not right wing, love your government to the death fascism. It’s some new strain of the two; uber-liberal fascism.

        • GA: I love your new word. Was just telling the wife and daughter about your new word at dinner.

          We like making new words, was a game we played with kids when young. That and rwriting the dictionary based on phonics. The kids always liked that one because there are so many words that don’t fit the rules.

          Had to do something on the 20 hour drives to Granny’s house.

          Keep on Tickin GA
          JAC

        • And NASA is getting it ready.

  16. Black Flag says:

    (For readability and further hijacking)

    Bama Dad

    According to bin Laden’s 1998 fatwa (religious decree), it is the duty of Muslims around the world to wage holy war on the U.S., American citizens

    Ok, so let’s present some evidence.

    1) Only a Islamic Holy man can issue a fatwa – and Bin Laden is not an Islamic Holy Man. Even if he made such a pronouncement, it carries no authority.

    2) Such a pronouncement of a fatwa from a non-holy man is blasphemous in Islamic religion. It is usurping the position of a holy man, and as he is a faithful follower, he would not dare do this.

    The actual piece comes from the London Arabic newspaper Al-Quds al-Arabi, that claimed that he, among others, signed this. Other than the claim of this newspaper, there is no evidence whatsoever that he did, or even agreed to it.

    “But to actions attributed to Bin Laden neither the FBI, the CIA nor the Saudi intelligence services has ever been able to establish bin Laden’s links to those crimes after years of trying.

    What evidence that has emerged from those ongoing investigations points the finger at other dissidents.”

  17. BF, I moved this down here for more clarity.

    You said;

    “What moral basis do you claim to enable you to inflict violence upon non-violence people?”

    What non violent people? You need to refresh my memory here as I do not recall that I advocated violence on non violent people ever in my life. I know that you cannot be talking about anarchists since the central ideal of anarchy is committing violence on anyone who disagrees with them.

    I know that this is a copy and paste, but I felt that you needed to see what wikipidia has to say about the definition of morality . . .

    Morality (from the Latin moralitas “manner, character, proper behavior”) has three principal meanings.

    In its first, descriptive usage, morality means a code of conduct which is held to be authoritative in matters of right and wrong. Morals are created by and define society, philosophy, religion, or individual conscience. An example of the descriptive usage could be “common conceptions of morality have changed significantly over time.”

    In its second, normative and universal sense, morality refers to an ideal code of conduct, one which would be espoused in preference to alternatives by all rational people, under specified conditions. In this “prescriptive” sense of morality as opposed to the above described “descriptive” sort of sense, moral value judgments such as “murder is immoral” are made. To deny ‘morality’ in this sense is a position known as moral skepticism, in which the existence of objective moral “truths” is rejected.[1]

    In its third usage, ‘morality’ is synonymous with ethics, the systematic philosophical study of the moral domain.[2]

    Ethics seeks to address questions such as how a moral outcome can be achieved in a specific situation (applied ethics), how moral values should be determined (normative ethics), what morals people actually abide by (descriptive ethics), what the fundamental nature of ethics or morality is, including whether it has any objective justification (meta-ethics), and how moral capacity or moral agency develops and what its nature is (moral psychology).[3] In applied ethics, for example, the prohibition against taking human life is controversial with respect to capital punishment, abortion and wars of invasion. In normative ethics, a typical question might be whether a lie told for the sake of protecting someone from harm is justified. In meta-ethics, a key issue is the meaning of the terms “right” or “wrong”. Moral realism would hold that there are true moral statements which report objective moral facts, whereas moral anti-realism would hold that morality is derived from any one of the norms prevalent in society (cultural relativism); the edicts of a god (divine command theory); is merely an expression of the speakers’ sentiments (emotivism); an implied imperative (prescriptive); falsely presupposes that there are objective moral facts (error theory). Some thinkers hold that there is no correct definition of right behavior, that morality can only be judged with respect to particular situations, within the standards of particular belief systems and socio-historical contexts. This position, known as moral relativism, often cites empirical evidence from anthropology as evidence to support its claims.[4] The opposite view, that there are universal, eternal moral truths are known as moral absolutism. Moral absolutists might concede that forces of social conformity significantly shape moral decisions, but deny that cultural norms and customs define morally right behavior.

    This sentence seem to sum it up pretty good; “morality means a code of conduct which is held to be authoritative in matters of right and wrong” which seems to me to be a consensus of society deciding what is moral and just rather than the INDIVIDUAL.

    What moral basis do I have to inflict violence? Certainly not on a non violent group, but then we humans are NOT a non violent group, are we?

    Neither are mice. let a cat back a mouse into a corner and the mouse will kick cat butt big time, every time.

    However, your question is and always has been an irrelevant question with the sole purpose to do nothing but befuddle the conversation.

    I choose to ignore it in all future conversations.

    Checkmate.(again, sigh) 😉

    • Black Flag says:

      If you believe a GROUP determines your morals:

      Then answer this question (attempt #4).

      If the majority regard it is moral to steal and kill a minority, and make it a law to do so, do you agree they are moral in doing so?

    • Black Flag says:

      What moral basis do I have to inflict violence? Certainly not on a non violent group, but then we humans are NOT a non violent group, are we?

      So you believe you can attack non-violent people because they MIGHT BE VIOLENT????

      Holy cow….(blink, blink)

      MadMom, you need not wonder why the world is all screwed up…

  18. Black Flag says:

    What caused the ‘click’ in my mind regarding 9/11 was this:


    “Danny Lewin was the first victim of the biggest attack in history that
    morning, in which almost 3,000 people died. An internal memorandum of the
    Federal Aviation Administration sets that in the course of a struggle that
    took place between Lewin, a graduate of Israel’s elite commando unit,
    Sayeret Matkal , and the four hijackers who were assaulting that cockpit,
    Lewin was murdered by Satam Al Suqami, a 25 year old Saudi.

    The testimony of the stewardess Amy Sweeney:

    Sweeney called Michael Woodward, the flight services supervisor in Boston,
    from the rear of the plane: “a hijacker slit the throat of a passenger in
    business class and the passenger appears to me to be dead.”

    Ponder…..

    In all the flights, this was the only known attack of hijackers on the passengers.

    The attack, from the testimony of the stewardess, occurred while the plane was still climbing and BEFORE the actual hijacking. They jumped this guy while he was still seated.

    Ponder….

    On board of all the aircraft were military and ex-military personal of some sort; all trained in various degrees of hand-to-hand combat.

    But, this guy – his background was Counter-terrorist. His job was to hunt down and kill terrorists on the ground. And he was very good at it.

    He could kill these guys with a pencil.

    The (supposed) terrorists were physically small men. Lewin was incredibly fit, powerful, 225lb killing machine.

    And he didn’t even take one of them out…. I call “impossible”…UNLESS they attacked him while he was still buckled in his seat, while the plane climbed to altitude.

    So why did they attack him before hijacking? Because they knew he could stop it.

    Ponder…..

    How did they know who he was to know that he could stop the hijacking?

    HOW DID THEY KNOW WHO HE WAS

    They didn’t have the manifest to Google the internet of all the passenger names…

    Lewin wasn’t sitting there in his commando uniform… he was retired and a millionaire business man. He looked like a rich businessman, not an Israeli killing machine.

    Yet they knew him.

    • Of course the plane was still climbing- any flight coming out of Boston headed to the west coast will still be climbing all the way to Albany, which is where the hijackers changed the trajectory of the plane. The murder of Danny Lewin occurred immediately before the hijackers, who were also seated in business class, took control of the cockpit. Again, think horse, not zebra. Most likely, Danny, as a trained counter terrorist, had noted suspicious behavior by the hijackers (clearly they were not belted in at that point, which he may have noted) and had made a move to take action, at which point, they attacked.

      • Black Flag says:

        Improbable.

        Lewin is a trained anti-terrorist commando credited with being one of the most successful and decorated.

        And he couldn’t take ONE of them…when he probably could have taken all of them.

        Remember this is airplane cabin – small tight isle – the best they can do is one at a time while stumbling over seats.

        He is significantly larger than any of them.

        He is significantly better trained then any of them (…or maybe not!?!)

        They had to have surprise – surprise means ‘foreknowledge’.

        • Nope. Don’t buy it. I read every stitch of information about the planes coming out of Boston, as I lived there for most of my adult life. If the hijackers jumped at once, with at least one from behind, while Lewin was unbelting; they could have sliced his throat before he had been able to pounce from his seat. He was also older. And the hijackers could have noted his notation of their suspicious behavior and signaled to each other. None of this leads me to believe they had to have any prior knowledge of Lewin’s background. They all could have simply been responding in real time to a potential threat, just as anyone with combat training would do.

          • Black Flag says:

            With all the military in the plane – even in uniform – it becomes bizarre that they pick on him – in civilian clothes.

            How do they know HE was the threat, and not the US Marines in the back?

          • Black Flag says:

            Old?? He was 31!!

            He outweighed his attacker – and ‘well trained’ … compared to an officer in Sayeret Matkal, an elite special forces unit of the Israeli Defence Force (IDF). Its main roles are counter-terrorism.

          • Black Flag says:

            Sorry, I don’t buy it.

            His killer was a 25 year old native of the Saudi Arabian city of Riyadh, al-Suqami was a law student at the King Saud University.

            Give me a break, a wimp law student, 25 years old vs. a combat veteran of counter-terrorism – who outweighed the law student by 75 lbs…..

            No way, MadMom, no way.

            • You are thinking zebras, not horses. The hijackers were in business class- split up between back and front rows of the section. Lewin could have noticed the two fore of him acting strangely, unbuckling, maybe pulling on their red headbands, and made a move. Meanwhile the hjackers aft of him have already jumped, noting HIS behavior. He didn’t know there were more than two of them. Think about it this way; what would YOU do in either situation? As one of the hijackers or as Lewin. Lewin was at a disadvantage regardless of size; he was outmanned, unarmed, didn’t know who these people were, what they were doing, or how many there were. He would not have been on high alert, unlike the hijackers. Ever heard of a woman who lifted a car off of her kid? That’s what adrenalin can do, and those guys were on a holy mission. That scenario is far more plausible than the one you suggest, and I would bet that any military (or other) strategist would agree with me.

    • USWeapon says:

      I imagine that I am far more qualified to answer this one than anyone else here. I understand what you are saying about Lewin. Be careful not to give him some sort of godlike status. I believe that had I been on that plane I could have personally taken out all of the hijackers. I am well familiar with the IDF (more so than you would imagine, but enough of that…). Let me just say that if this is the crux of your argument, you are not going to fare well… more later 😉

      • Black Flag says:

        It is improbable that they would have succeeded against him without the advantage of surprise.

        Surprise requires knowledge of who he was – which could not be gleaned at that moment.

        Therefore, he had to be someone they knew.

        • No. They were hypervigilant martyrs on a mission who detected a potential threat and took it out. You don’t think that military personnel in the field can, when on a dangerous mission for which they need to be super tuned in, can successfully take down a threat which inadvertantly happens to appear without foreknowledge of that threat? They can’t act on a second’s notice? These guys did undergo combat training in Afghanistan; the “lawyer” didn’t just jump from a courtroom onto a plane at Logan.

  19. Black Flag says:

    Question #3:

    The “hijackers” were mostly Saudi.

    They stole…. Saudi passports so to enter the US on the preferred clearance given to Saudis….

    (screechhhh….)

    Saudi’s stole Saudi passports so to get into the US.

    Why did they need to steal these passports when their own would have worked just fine?

    Perhaps they weren’t Saudi people in the first place…..?

    • USWeapon says:

      Or perhaps they were already on a watch list and couldn’t use their passports. Really, you are reaching here.

    • Black Flag says:

      If your claim is true, how was it that the FBI knew who these suspects were within hours after the event?

      So much for the theory of ‘disguise’….

      So either these guys are not who we think they were, or they were who they were and didn’t need to hide.

  20. Black Flag says:

    Ok, you got me. maybe you need to dumb it down a little for me BF!;-)

    Not dumb-down, but rephrase – sometimes a certain exchange of words will confuse anyone!

    If an asteroid hits the earth and kills all the people, is this an act of evil?

    Everyone is dead! But it’s not evil.

    After a global nuclear war, all the people are dead. Is this an act of evil?

    Probably. But everyone is dead – just like from the asteroid.

    So if the conclusion is the same, yet we judge the cause as different – what is the difference in the cause to affect such judgment?

    One is the consequence of the hand of MAN.

    The other is a consequence of the hand of GOD.

    One is neither good nor evil – no judgment.

    The other is judged as evil.

    So if God kills everyone, we say “That’s ok – it’s God! God’s will is good – a great plan, a great idea, ….etc.”

    But if MAN kills everyone we say “That’s terrible, he is evil, he will go to Hell, etc.”

    We are defining good and evil for ourselves on ourselves. God is not involved at all. It’s all God to God.

    You can only judge by contrast. Black is not white – we know black and white because both exist.

    We judge good and evil because both exist.

    But to God there is only white. What contrast can there be any judgment if everything is the same color?

    All judgment comes from man upon himself.

    God needs no religion or morals

  21. Black Flag says:

    Problem #4

    The Third World Trade tower to fall.

    How many planes hit the Trade towers? Two

    How many building fell down? Three.

    Ooops.

    WTC7 is across the street, and it fell down. It was not hit by any plane. It was lightly damaged by debris.

    WTC5 and 6 were in the direct path of the damage debris of WT1 and 2. They did not fall down, even though they were severely damage by fire and debris.

    WTC7 was the HQ of the Disaster services for NYC. WTC7 was reinforced so to survive any disaster in NYC – including nuclear attack. It was capable of surviving a near-miss.

    Yet, it fell down.

    No steel building in history every fell down due to fire. Yet, three in one day did – including one not hit by any plane.

    With no history of collapse – WTC7 was predicted to fall down. How did they know? It had never happened before (except of WTC1 and 2) – yet it was predicted in advance.

    The major news outlets all made the same report – claimed WT7 fell down – while during the report, they live visual feeds showed the building still standing.

    Example from BBC
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5661808404862296083

    There are examples from CBS and NBC, to name two others, that pre-announced its collapse.

    Ooops…

    • I'm learning says:

      Dang – I didn’t believe in conspiracy theories until I watched:
      http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3340274697167011147

      But that changed my mind. Then I really didn’t think 9/11 would be one either but now…

      • Don’t believe it, IL. USW, if this turns into a conspiracy theorist’s blog, I fear you are going to lose some credibility, in spite of your well informed and meticuloulsy researched posts. Well, except amongst the conspiracy theorists. 🙂

      • Watch this video:

    • Two 757’s full of jet fuel hit two of the largest towers in the world in a relatively small perimeter. From a physics standpoint, I don’t see why the near simultaneous collapse of said enormous buildings in said small perimeter would not have a catastrophic effect on the stability of any nearby building. Perfectly plausible. If W7 wasn’t destabilized, it would have been considered a miracle. We know that the specific architecture used to build W1 and W2 contributed to their collapse. W7 was likely built using similar architectural supports.

      • Black Flag says:

        First, jet fuel (kerosene) is not that explosive, nor does it burn hot enough to disturb steel.

        Further, most of the fuel was consumed upon impact, and outside of the building (see Fireball).

        WTC7 is across the street between a hotel and a post office – both of which were structurally inferior (remember WTC7 was reinforced to sustain a near hit from a nuclear weapon).

        • St. Paul’s Church, an 18th century building clearly not built to withstand a nuclear bomb, also still stands across the street. Many assumptions were made about W1 and W2 in regards to their ability to withstand various catastrophic scenarios, but those assumptions never included being hit by a 757 filled with fuel, a situation for which the buildings were clearly not built to withstand. I’m guessing that the architects of W7 did not put that building under rigorous testing to determine its stability in the event that the W1 and W2 would almost simultaneously collapse within spitting distance. It seems that the builders of W1, W2, and W7 should have gotten their building plans from the Postmaster General or the Episcopal Church.

        • Black Flag says:

          Incorrect, MadMom.

          The buildings were, in fact, designed to withstand multiple jet airliner collusion – based on the 707.

          John Skilling

          John Skilling was the head structural engineer for the World Trade Center. In a 1993 interview, Skilling stated that the Towers were designed to withstand the impact and fires resulting from the collision of a large jetliner such as Boeing 707 or McDonald Douglas DC-8.
          Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed, … The building structure would still be there.

          http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19930227&slug=1687698

          A white paper released on February 3, 1964 states that the Towers could have withstood impacts of jetliners travelling 600 mph — a speed greater than the impact speed of either jetliner used on 9/11/01.
          The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707—DC 8) traveling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact.

          • Exactly. As I stated above, the planes were 757’s, not 707’s. That point is made several times in The 911 Report. They did not test for the impact of 757’s.

        • Black Flag says:

          The W1 and W2 would almost simultaneously collapse within spitting distance.

          First, they did not fall “almost” simultaneously at all.

          The first fell @ 9:59 a.m, the second a half hour later…10:28 a.m and WTC 7, bizarrely, at 5:20 p.m

          WTC 7 is hardly in spitting distance –
          http://wirednewyork.com/wtc/wtc_map.htm

          Please note in the map, WTC5 and 6 are directly in the debris path, yet did not fall.

          WTC3 and 4 are directly adjacent to WTC 2, yet they did not collapse.

          • In terms of impact on a destabilized building’s structure, the collapses were near simultaneous. And so what if the other WTC buildings did not fall? As I stated previously, neither did the nearby St. Paul’s church built in the mid 1700’s. As far as spitting distance, don’t know where you grew up, but in NH, they teach us to spit really far. 🙂 I’ve been to the WTC site many, many times, both before and after 9/11 (I worked in NYC), and while it’s a big space, it’s not so big considering the massive scale of what once stood there.

            You believe what you want; it’s a free country, for the time being anyway. I’m beginning to believe some other seemingly far fetched theories these days. But in the end, the simplest explanation, in the absence of irrefutable evidence to the contrary, is the real thing 99.9% of the time. I see no irrefutable evidence in your argument.

    • Can I add to this…why was there an explosion after the attach and then the collapse. Fast forword…the buildings are being rebuilt, the people wanted the name to stay the same yet the it was not what the people wanted. The WTC name went from Freedom Towers to…One World Trade Center…One World…anybody getting it yet? Now back to our regularly scheduled program.

  22. Off topic here, but I feel the need to pass this info along to all I can.

    The W.H.O. has increased the swine flu level to phase 4, which means that it has now increased to “increased in human to human transmissions”.

    You can check it out at the following URL;

    http://www.who.int/en/

  23. Black Flag says:

    Madmom

    Lewin could have noticed the two fore of him acting strangely, unbuckling, maybe pulling on their red headbands, and made a move.

    Unbuckling is not a sign of suspicion.

    Two, if he did suspect something, he would not have been trapped in his seat. He noticed nothing up until he was attacked.

    Meanwhile the hjackers at of him have already jumped, noting HIS behavior.

    In all other cases, including this plane, they did not attack anyone else – even when there was military uniformed people on board. It is bizarre that they picked on this one.

    He didn’t know there were more than two of them.

    Bizarre. Even I would suspect multiple perpetrators in any hijack – it is the norm in modern, organized, hijacking. He is Israeli – they have had tremendous experience on this matter.

    Think about it this way; what would YOU do in either situation?

    That is my point – two ways.

    I know what I would do – and that is why it is improbable that he was anything but surprised.

    Second, he is trained. Whereas my capability would be at best, muted – his response would be deadly.

    Yet, no harm came to the hijackers.

    Utterly improbable.

    As one of the hijackers or as Lewin. Lewin was at a disadvantage regardless of size; he was outmanned, unarmed, didn’t know who these people were, what they were doing, or how many there were.

    These guys were SMALL, and could not be well armed due to standard security which would have minimized the weapons they could carry. Small knifes at best…and that wouldn’t scare him at all.

    Outnumbered is an issue if they have mobility – but even I can talk 10 guys, one at a time.

    Ever heard of a woman who lifted a car off of her kid?

    Urban myth.

    That’s what adrenalin can do, and those guys were on a holy mission.

    I don’t care how much adrenalin can do in a law student he is no match for a trained anti-terrorist specialist.

    • These points are merely assumptions of how the whole thing went down; I don’t know EXACTLY what happened outside of the written reports, and neither do you. But it is FAR more plausible that four guys (even small guys), who have had some combat training, who were on a martyrdom mission, who had weapons, who had the element of surprise on their side, and whose bodies had the benefit of adrenalin and whatever else it is that keeps fighting men frosty, took down Lewin because he was the only one that they sensed posed a threat than a bizarre conspiracy scenario that only Rube Goldberg could dream up. Are you saying that if you were in an analagous scenario (say your wife and child were in harm’s way and you were determined to save them) and a much larger and even better trained foe than you appeared on your radar, you wouldn’t have the aptitude or ability to take him out, with the aid of three comrades with equal passion as you? Highly unlikely. A glance in the eyes could have been all the hijackers needed to ascertain that Lewin posed a threat, because they were on high alert. Lewin was not.

      • Black Flag says:

        Study after study demonstrates that those with high level of combat training far outperform simple “adrenalin” – in fact, adrenalin will degrade performance in high stress, unfamiliar, situations.

        No doubt they had surprise – that is my point. They knew who he was – BEFORE they hijacked the plane.

        You contradict yourself – first you claim he was suspicious, then you claim he was surprised.

        He cannot be both.

        • Sure he could have been both. He could have been suspicious of two jokers sitting ahead of him suddenly unbuckling, sweating, glancing, who knows what? But he may have been surprised by the two jokers from behind, who were suddenly at his neck with a box cutter. Who the heck knows? I’m assuming you have some military or similar training. It surprises me that you find this so hard to believe.

  24. Black Flag says:

    Dee>/b>

    While I haven’t read your link, we’ve had flu’s equally or worse than the Spanish flu.

    Flu by its nature is a bad disease – thousands die from it ever year. However, pandemic…no way…it is a purposeful incitement of the population – why? I don’t know. We had this with the “Bird Flu” too – shutdown international travel for nearly a year because of …20 deaths in China….bizarre.

    • Scared people are easier to control, fool, distract?

    • Black Flag says:

      RE: Pathogen

      Yes, the flu – like the cold virus – is particularly adept to mutation.

      The flu virus tends to mutate in unhygienic regions – which is why they tend to start around rural areas (swine, bird (chicken), etc.) and around animals.

  25. Man there are allot of post’s to this so I was only able to read the first few and thought madmom was on to something, but……
    in regards to what do we do, yes we live in a free society and should we use the pricipals of what our country was based on to solve the problems that are occurring in our government. The first answer would be yes, but the problem with that is it is our government creating those very problems. The very government which is “supposed” to abide by the constitution and bill of rights. Instead they ARE drifting further and further away, a little at a time. The problem with this is that the citizens continue on with thier daily routines as normal because we have lived in such a good state for so long. If you tell the truth 99% percent of the time you can tell one big lie and get a way with it, and we all know that when things happen slowly, they seem natural. This is the case with our governement and don’t think for a second it’s not by design. We will in the near future not have the ability to change things with respect to our constitution because it will be a dead document if we don’t stand up and be heard NOW.

  26. Black Flag says:

    These guys did undergo combat training in Afghanistan; the “lawyer” didn’t just jump from a courtroom onto a plane at Logan.

    There is absolutely ZERO evidence for such a claim.

    There is no training they could receive that could prepare them for combat with a trained and experienced killing machine that Lewin was.

  27. MY TURN

    I to have looked into the conspiracy theories, claims and etc, etc. IT IS NOT RELAVENT ANYMORE!!!! WHY!!!!

    BECAUSE THOSE OF US HAVING THIS DISCUSSION HAVE ALREADY REACHED THE CONCLUSION OUR GOVERNMENT IS CORRUPT AND NEEDS TO BE REPLACED.

    Education of the rest of us is critical to getting enought folks motivated to do something meaningful. We have plenty of examples to do that without using the 9/11 conspiracy stuff. I am guessing we would be able to sell economic meltdown conspiracy much easier. After all, those on the left already believe it. Remember, the fact that conspiracies like these can even flourish is a reflection of a govt that has gotten far to big, powerful and out of touch. Otherwise the daylight of truth would expose any rot.

    Right now I am more concerned with the possibility that others are pulling the levers on our economy and parts of congress. If they are, then getting rid of congress will not be enough to fix the problem. If the problem is just our govt it will be far easier to fix, because we have the means. Whether we have the desire or fortitude is yet unknown.

    If it is more than our govt we got some real challenges ahead and an entirely new strategy may be required. I watched that video today on the oil noncrisis (posted by ImLearning above). It put some pieces together with the federal reserve issues and other things. Bottom line….it gave me the willies, almost as bad as those damn dancing rattlers on the GOOOH site. Essom, did you find that when you went there?? That alone may have changed my mind about migrating to Texas.

    TIME TO FOCUS
    Love JAC

    • USWeapon says:

      Great point JAC

    • LOL JAC! It seems that BF and I are like pitbulls pulling on two sides of a piece of steak. I have to say this, though. While our government is really screwed up, it makes no sense to advance conspiracy theories in the absence of near irrefutable evidence. At this point in our history, it is important to be critical minded and not get swept away with the growing tide of conspiracy theories, which are in absolute unabated abundance. Some may very well be true, but it’s critical to separate the wheat from the chafe in order to attack the real issues head on.

  28. I do have a question on the Twin Towers but not on the structural point. My question would be the evidence. I have some expierence in investigations, but none to that level. I hardly believe that a drivers liecense of one of the terrorist would have been found at the base of the tower’s rubble hardly untoched shortly after the collapse. Nor do I understand why the towers were closed from the 50th floor up just a few days before the impacts for maintenance. The pentagon is much more serious in the evidence department. Those two huge titanum engines left no holes and the angle at which this huge plane came in at. You would have to flown the plane approximately 2 feet off the ground for better than a mile to get that angle of impact, and the video to the twin towers clearly show the engines going into the buildings without the wings folding back. The terrorist, to my knowledge, never took commercial flight lessons, and those plains are not jet fighters so the skill needed to fly such a big plane so close to the ground would be out of thier scope, not to mention the lack of video at a highly protected area. Also, the amount of time it took the jet fighters to scramble is unheard of.. Just a fluke…not here, something much bigger going on. Facts are facts, and thinking outside the box makes a great investigator.

    • Black Flag says:

      OFFICIAL ACCOUNT OF 9/11 FLIGHT CONTRADICTED BY GOVERNMENT’S OWN DATA

      Pilots for 9/11 Truth, an international organization of pilots and aviation professionals, petitioned the National Transportation and Safety Board (NTSB) via the Freedom of Information Act to obtain their 2002 report, “Flight Path Study-American Airlines Flight 77”, consisting of a Comma Separated Value (CSV) file and Flight Path Animation, allegedly derived from Flight 77’s Flight Data Recorder (FDR). The data provided by the NTSB contradict the 9/11 Commission Report in several significant ways:

      1. The NTSB Flight Path Animation approach path and altitude does not support official events.
      2. All Altitude data shows the aircraft at least 300 feet too high to have struck the light poles.
      3. The rate of descent data is in direct conflict with the aircraft being able to impact the light poles and be captured in the Dept of Defense “5 Frames” video of an object traveling nearly parallel with the Pentagon lawn.
      4. The record of data stops at least one second prior to official impact time.
      5. If data trends are continued, the aircraft altitude would have been at least 100 feet too high to have hit the Pentagon.

      In August, 2006, members of Pilots for 9/11 Truth received these documents from the NTSB and began a close analysis of the data they contain. After expert review and cross check, Pilots for 9/11 Truth has concluded that the information in these NTSB documents does not support, and in some instances factually contradicts, the official government position that American Airlines Flight 77 struck the Pentagon on the morning of September 11, 2001 .According to the 9/11 Commission Report, which relied heavily upon the NTSB Flight Path Study, American Airlines Flight 77 struck the Pentagon at 9:37:46 AM on the morning of September 11, 2001 . However, the reported impact time according to the NTSB Flight Path Study is 09:37:45 . Also according to reports, American Airlines Flight 77 struck the Pentagon and by doing so, struck down 5 light poles on Highway 27 in its path to the west wall.

      The information provided by the NTSB does not support the 9/11 Commission Report of American Airlines Flight 77 impact with the Pentagon.

    • Hmmm, so where are the people who were on that plane that didn’t hit the Pentagon? Including one of my co-workers from the biotechnology company I worked for at the time?

      • Black Flag says:

        The question is not whether there was a plane hitting the Pentagon.

        The question is why the data released by the government is obviously wrong about an event so well recorded.

        We have the NTSB giving the data of the flight that directly contradicts eyewitnesses, physical evidence and video evidence.

        So what the heck is going on? Why would the government actually obscure and create doubt?

      • Very sorry to hear that madmom. Did you know her well? It’s always a tragedy, even for friends. I can’t answer that question, except the evidence in my opinion dosen’t support a terrorist attack from a third world country. I am sorry. I am sure what you say is true and so the plane must have hit the Pentagon, but for the life of me I can’t figure out where the engines went, how those terrorist from a third world country learned to fly so well and why our own highly protected Pentagon had absolutely no footage and the media for the twin towers had more coverage than the Iraq war in real time.

        Best Regards

  29. Well, good show citizen, I agree. They are underhanded and I am a veteran and I love my country with all my heart. I love my government too, but I feel as if they have been infiltrated by people NOT from this country…LOL We need to figure this thing out but more importantly we must act, just as our ancestor’s did. I don’t condone violence against our government but if they put us in harms way and destroy our country then it will be up to God after prayer.

  30. I’ll start off by saying that overall I don’t really agree with the article. I see some merit in a few of your points and understand your view, I just don’t agree with most of it. The part that irritates me though is in green with the references to fascism. It seems to me that any sane person could look at the definition of the word http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism and realize that it doesn’t belong. Personally I don’t think socialism fits either, but the fascism remark really blows me away 🙂

    • JJ: If you have read the other posts on this subject you will find that USW is using a more historically accurate definition of fascism.
      A portion of the original political/economic definition remains in Webster but is not included in the web page you referenced.

      That is “private economic enterprise under centralized goventmental control”. Whereas socialism was traditionally definded as govt ownership of the means of production and distribution, fascism is govt control of production and distribution through use of the private sector.

      If you review the beginning of this system you will find it did not have many of the components now described by Webster and others. The points of race, nationalism, dictatorship etc are tied more closely to Hitler, who was not a full blown fascist in the traditional sense. Remember he was a “social democrat”. Fascism existed for many years before Hitler came along and it looked nothing like the system Hitler imposed upon Germany and eventually Europe.

      You will find that the use of the term here has not been linked to Nazism as your comment seems to indicate. Do you not agree that in order to understand what is going on in the world that we need to be honest and accurately describe it? You stated you felt our system was not socialism either. That leaves only capitalism and communism. We know it isn’t either of those. That sends us back to the two we have been assessing. If you have another suggestion I am sure we would all be willing to discuss the option.

      Now I for one am curious as to what it is you actually disagree with, as you indicated you didn’t agree with most of it. I certainly hope you stick around to discuss this as you will find everyone quite civil. Especially compared to other blogs.

      Looking forward to your thoughts
      JAC

  31. Black Flag says:

    Madmom

    In terms of impact on a destabilized building’s structure, the collapses were near simultaneous.

    How so? The buildings are not connected.

    Further, you’re concept of simultaneous is … radical, to be generous.

    And so what if the other WTC buildings did not fall? As I stated previously, neither did the nearby St. Paul’s church built in the mid 1700’s.

    Never in history have steel structures collapsed due to fire. To have these do so, in the manner they did, is bizarre.

    But in the end, the simplest explanation, in the absence of irrefutable evidence to the contrary, is the real thing 99.9% of the time.

    First, the simplest explanation is NOT the official one – it defies so many laws of physics a new science would need to be invented.

    I see no irrefutable evidence in your argument.

    I see your evidence as a requirement to re-writing physics.

    I’d rather keep the laws of physics and find the truth.

  32. Bee in my Bonnet says:

    Hi all,
    A little off topic but to calm things down a bit regarding the flu scare. 36,000 people die every year in the US due to flu related illness. No one has died yet in the US or Canada. All this rhetoric is necessary to get the appropriate resources in place IN CASE things get worse.

  33. Bee in my Bonnet says:

    USW
    I’ve just read all 5 articles regarding the march to socialism. Great information. I’m looking forward to your thoughts on Obama’s role in the grand scheme of things.

    I’m also very much looking forward to your articles on universal health care as I am from Canada and we have universal health care up here. I look forward to your perspective.

    • USWeapon says:

      And I will look forward to your input on the health care topic as someone living under the system now.

  34. Hey, like I said, believe what you want. Honestly though, (and as USW said earlier), if this is the crux of your argument regarding this issue, you are stretching it farther than Oprah in a lycra catsuit.

  35. Black Flag says:

    MadMom,

    I’m assuming you have some military or similar training. It surprises me that you find this so hard to believe.

    That’s the point, Madmom.

    There were US Marines in uniform on the flight – yet, the terrorists took no note of them.

    And we both agree – it was a surprise attack – why the attack ON HIM, and not the direct obvious risks?

    Too bizarre, MadMom.

    • I have to agree, very good point. Marines are definetley brain washed, I know. They would have certainly been and advisary worth confronting quickly.

    • Black Flag says:

      Here is the seating plan of Flight 11.

      Note, please Lewin is 9B….surrounded by other passengers. Two hijacker are in the very front (orange).

      If Lewin did as you say – appear to become suspicious, pray tell how could the two in the very front and the two in the near front see that? He was behind them…..

      How could they communicate their attack being so split up?

      …unless they knew PRIOR to the hijack exactly who to attack ….

  36. Black Flag says:

    Top Anomalies
    Selected Anomalies in the Official Account of 9/11/01

    * Indications of Foreknowledge
    o Pre-attack put option surges anticipated post-attack stock declines:
    + Put/call ratios on American Airlines and United Airlines stock increased five-fold and twenty-fold.
    o High officials avoided the attack targets:
    + John Ashcroft stopped flying commercial.
    + Salman Rushdie, Willie Brown, and Pentagon officials were warned not to fly on the eve of the attack.
    + On 9/11/01 Warren Buffett, an investor in unmanned aerial vehicle maker MITRE, hosted a breakfast meeting of WTC CEOs at Offutt AFB, where President Bush later landed that day.
    o The World Trade Center and Pentagon were anticipated terrorist targets:
    + War game scenarios targeted the WTC and Pentagon.
    + The use of jetliners as weapons was anticipated.

    * Military’s Non-Response
    o The official story posits a long series of improbable failures:
    + The official timelines blame the FAA for inexplicably long delays in notifying the military, after originally claiming to have been notified sooner but without specific locations.
    + Jets were not scrambled from nearest bases.
    + Jets in the air were not vectored to intercept jetliners.
    + According to NORAD and 9/11 Commission timelines, military jets flew at small fractions of their top speeds.
    o Claims that hijacked jetliners couldn’t be tracked contrasts with ability of the FAA to land over 4000 aircraft at different destinations in two hours.
    o At least four simultaneous war game exercises were being conducted on 9/11/01:
    + The NRO exercise involved a plane-crash-into-building scenario.
    + Operations Vigilant Warrior and Vigilant Guardian used scenarios involving hijacked passenger planes.
    o After presiding over the worst air defense failure in US history, the commander of NORAD, head of the Joint Chiefs, and Secretary of Defense were awarded with promotions and budget increases.

    * Pentagon Attack Anomalies
    o The Pentagon was left undefended until after being hit at 9:38:
    + The Pentagon should be the best-defended building in the world.
    + The Pentagon was hit more than 80 minutes into the attack.
    + It is 10 miles from Andrews Air Force Base.
    + Cheney watched the attack plane approach from 50 miles out.
    o The attack targeted Wedge 1 of Pentagon’s west wing:
    + Wedge 1 was sparsely occupied, nearing completion of renovation.
    + Wedge 1 was the only one that had blast-hardened walls.
    + The top brass was in the opposite side of the Pentagon.
    o The alleged suicide pilots lacked the requisite piloting skills:
    + The attack maneuver required extreme piloting skill.
    + None of the alleged hijackers had flown jets.
    + Hani Hanjour, alleged pilot of Flight 77, was a notoriously bad pilot.

    * Total Collapse of WTC Building 7
    o Is the only case of total collapse of large steel-framed high-rise building blamed on fire.
    o The collapse had all of the features of a controlled demolition implosion:
    + It fell straight down with precise radial symmetry.
    + Its rapid fall was within 10 percent of gravitational free-fall speed.
    + It collapsed into a tidy rubble pile mostly within the block that the building occupied.

    * Total Destruction of the Twin Towers
    o Symmetry and thoroughness of destruction rules out natural processes.
    o Dozens of firefighters described explosions and likened the falls of the Towers to controlled demolitions.
    o Destruction exhibited main features of controlled demolitions:
    + The destruction was total, leaving no parts of the Towers intact.
    + The falls began precipitously after loud explosions were heard.
    + Energetic jets of gas and dust emerged from the facade.
    o Destruction was more thorough than conventional demolitions:
    + The explosions of Towers were up to 800 feet in diameter.
    + The rubble was shards of metal and dust.
    + More than 1000 bodies were “vaporized”.
    + Extreme temperatures persisted in the rubble for three months.
    o Dust contains residues of explosives:
    + Abundant minute iron-rich spheroids match the structure and chemical composition of thermite by-products
    + Chips consistently found in samples are a nano-engineered thermitic material the the physical structure, chemical composition, and thermal behavior of a high-tech pyrotechnic with high explosive power.

    * Suppression and Destruction of Evidence
    o The World Trade Center steel was systematically destroyed:
    + Controlled Demolition Inc’s plan for recycling steel was submitted 11 days after the attack, and approved.
    + Most of the steel was shipped to Asia for recycling.
    + Investigators were barred from the crime scene, and saw little of the steel.
    o Scores of videos from around Pentagon were confiscated and never released.
    o The NTSB was not allowed to investigate crashes.

    * Overt Omissions in Official Reports
    o The 9/11 Commission made hundreds of glaring omissions:
    + The Report makes no mention of Building 7.
    + It called the structural cores of Twin Towers “hollow steel shaft[s].”
    + It did not mention the privatization of the World Trade Center six weeks before the attack.
    o NIST avoided the core issue of the ‘collapses’:
    + It did not consider events beyond when the Towers were “poised for collapse.”
    + It did not demonstrate that computer models predicted “collapse initiation.”
    + It disingenuously evaded calls to test for explosive residues.

  37. Now that’s what I’m talking about. Just curious, is all that in these reports your talking about?

    • Black Flag says:

      …and more.

      There are more questions and contradictions – and even more fueled by misinformation and purposeful confusion.

      It is an unholy mess – with the government resisting any real attempt to offer clarity.

      It is such a big mess, when the real truth comes out, it probably will be lost in the noise – which is, I believe, the plan.

      • It’s horrid to think they masterminded all this for a specific change in our beliefs. You know I just can’t imagine how people can sit by and see the damage to our country and go on with thier lives without demanding the truth from our government. It is OUR government, not there’s, they work for us. They are the laizon (can’t spell late at night) between the states. Everyone is in bed with everyone and I am so tired of it.

  38. Sorry if I have to disagree with some posts on foreknowledge but you have to remember that before 9/11 hijakers would take over a plane and make demands for money, prisoner relase or some other point that they were trying to get through and then have the plane flown to a netrual destination where they would realease the passangers and either escape or be caught by authorities. The absurd thing is after 9/11 the rules have drastically changed. If hijakers tried the same plan every passanger on the palne would turn on them. Even if they had a gun and it was a small plane the 60 or so passangers would take out 3-4 hijakers before letting them do what ever they want even if 8 or so died the american people today will no longer tolerate it. That is why I beleive it will be a long time before we see another hijacking of a plane. Ohh and don’t forget the Federal Marshals on the flights now to. As to the conspiracy therories I do not believe the Government caused 9/11. I do believe that there was a state of shock and that everyone was rushing to find out what occured where and when. With the disorganization of federal agencies and communication it would be easy to have
    the incident down with different facts from different agencies. The 9/11 commision report was an attemp to take all accounts, investigations, and data from all agencies and make 1 report that they believed to be true. Its not that they are trying to misrepresent facts its that they report on the information that they have at the time to the best of thier abilities. The Government is made up of human beings so theres bound to be many unintentinal mistakes 😉

    • I can understand you not wanting to agree because, after all, it is our government. Yet again, how did our country gain independence from an unfair government. One of the things they did was dress up as indians and throw taxed tea into the ocean. This is obviously not the same but people in high positions that have the potential to gain allot if the right atmosphere is reached my try to control that atmosphere.

  39. Truthseeker says:

    I just Heard Pres. Obama said that he wished he could turn a switch and Congress “Falls inline”. Isn’t that communism?

  40. francis key says:

    did you know that our country was taken over in 2001 on 911

  41. Wishing you a very happy and prosperous new year !

%d bloggers like this: