and here we have the Japanese Parliament questioning the "official" 9.11 story.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UEVcuJaiak Yukihisa Fujita of the Japan Democratic party, made a 20 minute long statement at the House of Councillors, the upper house of the Diet (parliament) of Japan. He questioned the official version of 9/11 presented to the Japanese government and the public by the US administration in a session of the defence commission.
And in all of those cases, there's the matter of the tens to hundreds of thousands of conspirators who would have to have their nefarious plans unfold without a hitch and stay that way for decades or centuries - in a world where, try as they might, the richest and most powerful people who have the most to lose can't even make the stock market keep moving in their favor even though it's something completely man-made. Such human perfection would be logistically unachievable even if the immutable forces governing our universe DIDN'T make the schemes impossible from day 1.
i know that in my german family history, public deception has been the rule, rather than the exception. the entire country was deceived! that is... millions of suckers, and millions of conspirators. their plans did not come off without a hitch. the ruling party had to use multiple overlapping backup plans implemented through a compartmentalized society trained to trust authority. they also had plenty of expendable believers that were thrown under the bus every time a plan was exposed. some of these patsies were willing to take one for the team. if you truly supported the effort, falling on your sword to protect your superiors was the honourable thing to do. if the patsy was reluctant to be the fall guy, there were other ways to coerce and convince the person to play ball.
there was a lot of "just doing my job" and "just following orders" which was not accepted as a valid defense at Nuremburg. the ruling party committed atrocities, genocides, and false flags and they got away with it... for a long time. all they did was lie to their own people, "for their own good". the doubters and dissenters either kept their mouth shut or suffered ridicule, persecution, and worse, for simply questioning the "official" storyline. i have talked to dozens of WW2 germans, including my own relatives. in the words of Mark Twain - "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." or as George Santayana put it - "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
i was a trader for years. i studied hard with the Canadian Securities Institute. https://www.csi.ca that was where i first learned about the fractional reserve system and the fraud that is the FEDERAL RESERVE. here are 25 facts about the FEDERAL RESERVE. it is privately owned! http://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/default.htm the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit stated that: "The Reserve Banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of the FTCA [the Federal Tort Claims Act], but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations." http://www.federalreserve.gov/OTHERFRB.HTM it is one big insider theft game. it is like gambling on horses. you can do all the research you want, and try to guess intelligently, or you can just bet on a hunch, but the house always wins. there are numerous investigations and arrests regarding conspiracy to commit fraud. that means that there must be conspiracies. a conspiracy is a plan. the rich and powerful devise plans. they must! or they would not stay rich and powerful. the success of those plans relies on secrecy. all one has to do is imagine that some of those rich and powerful people are not nice, and some might even be evil. some of them could be immoral or insane. some lack empathy, and some are sadistic. if these folks find each other and decide to work together, then you have a criminal conspiracy. it happens all the time. i have seen it in every business or organization i have been involved with. why not among the rich and powerful?
besides, the really rich and powerful, the ones who print and control the money supply do not rely on fiat currency. money is a belief system designed to control and motivate workers into production.
If we can't think for ourselves, if we're unwilling to question authority, then we're just putty in the hands of those in power. But if the citizens are educated and form their own opinions, then those in power work for us. In every country, we should be teaching our children the scientific method and the reasons for a Bill of Rights. --Carl Sagan
Carl Sagan despised conspiracy theories and devoted his life to fighting them. You are quoting him in opposition to his own beliefs, statements, and values.
the quote speaks for itself. as does this one... “One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.” - Carl Sagan -
Originally Posted By: SoccerStar
If your point is "the media is biased and secrecy is bad," that's cool, I'm right with you.
questions about discrepancies in "official" stories should not be shunned. questions should be accepted, addressed, answered, and eliminated. especially when the event involves the death and suffering of people.
the desire to "get to the bottom of it" is no insult to the victims. questions regarding discrepancies should be welcomed. investigations should be encouraged. no stone should be left unturned. conclusive reports must be able to withstand continuous and ongoing scrutiny from future generations.
unfortunately, questions are opposed. doubters are resented. scrutiny is rejected. this is a dangerous environment.
The American people are used to being addressed by an American President. Not a Russian one.
But Vladimir Putin knows that the US public and politicians are deeply uneasy with the prospect of American military intervention in Syria. His opinion piece in the New York Times may be an attempt to exploit and maintain that scepticism.
here is the text of that open letter printed in the new york times.
"RECENT events surrounding Syria have prompted me to speak directly to the American people and their political leaders. It is important to do so at a time of insufficient communication between our societies.
Relations between us have passed through different stages. We stood against each other during the cold war. But we were also allies once, and defeated the Nazis together. The universal international organization — the United Nations — was then established to prevent such devastation from ever happening again.
The United Nations’ founders understood that decisions affecting war and peace should happen only by consensus, and with America’s consent the veto by Security Council permanent members was enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The profound wisdom of this has underpinned the stability of international relations for decades.
No one wants the United Nations to suffer the fate of the League of Nations, which collapsed because it lacked real leverage. This is possible if influential countries bypass the United Nations and take military action without Security Council authorization.
The potential strike by the United States against Syria, despite strong opposition from many countries and major political and religious leaders, including the pope, will result in more innocent victims and escalation, potentially spreading the conflict far beyond Syria’s borders. A strike would increase violence and unleash a new wave of terrorism. It could undermine multilateral efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and further destabilize the Middle East and North Africa. It could throw the entire system of international law and order out of balance.
Syria is not witnessing a battle for democracy, but an armed conflict between government and opposition in a multireligious country. There are few champions of democracy in Syria. But there are more than enough Qaeda fighters and extremists of all stripes battling the government. The United States State Department has designated Al Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, fighting with the opposition, as terrorist organizations. This internal conflict, fueled by foreign weapons supplied to the opposition, is one of the bloodiest in the world.
Mercenaries from Arab countries fighting there, and hundreds of militants from Western countries and even Russia, are an issue of our deep concern. Might they not return to our countries with experience acquired in Syria? After all, after fighting in Libya, extremists moved on to Mali. This threatens us all.
From the outset, Russia has advocated peaceful dialogue enabling Syrians to develop a compromise plan for their own future. We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law. We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today’s complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos. The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not. Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defense or by the decision of the Security Council. Anything else is unacceptable under the United Nations Charter and would constitute an act of aggression.
No one doubts that poison gas was used in Syria. But there is every reason to believe it was used not by the Syrian Army, but by opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons, who would be siding with the fundamentalists. Reports that militants are preparing another attack — this time against Israel — cannot be ignored.
It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan “you’re either with us or against us.”
But force has proved ineffective and pointless. Afghanistan is reeling, and no one can say what will happen after international forces withdraw. Libya is divided into tribes and clans. In Iraq the civil war continues, with dozens killed each day. In the United States, many draw an analogy between Iraq and Syria, and ask why their government would want to repeat recent mistakes.
No matter how targeted the strikes or how sophisticated the weapons, civilian casualties are inevitable, including the elderly and children, whom the strikes are meant to protect.
The world reacts by asking: if you cannot count on international law, then you must find other ways to ensure your security. Thus a growing number of countries seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction. This is logical: if you have the bomb, no one will touch you. We are left with talk of the need to strengthen nonproliferation, when in reality this is being eroded.
We must stop using the language of force and return to the path of civilized diplomatic and political settlement.
A new opportunity to avoid military action has emerged in the past few days. The United States, Russia and all members of the international community must take advantage of the Syrian government’s willingness to place its chemical arsenal under international control for subsequent destruction. Judging by the statements of President Obama, the United States sees this as an alternative to military action.
I welcome the president’s interest in continuing the dialogue with Russia on Syria. We must work together to keep this hope alive, as we agreed to at the Group of 8 meeting in Lough Erne in Northern Ireland in June, and steer the discussion back toward negotiations.
If we can avoid force against Syria, this will improve the atmosphere in international affairs and strengthen mutual trust. It will be our shared success and open the door to cooperation on other critical issues.
My working and personal relationship with President Obama is marked by growing trust. I appreciate this. I carefully studied his address to the nation on Tuesday. And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is “what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.” It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal."
Vladimir V. Putin September 12, 2013 MOSCOW
here we have the opinion of a U.S.Congressman. Former Rep. Ron Paul, (R-Texas), argues the U.S. should stay out of Syria.
Whistleblower: The NSA Is Lying – U.S. Government Has Copies of Most of Your Emails
National Security Agency whistleblower William Binney reveals he believes domestic surveillance has become more expansive under President Obama than President George W. Bush. He estimates the NSA has assembled 20 trillion "transactions" — phone calls, emails and other forms of data — from Americans. This likely includes copies of almost all of the emails sent and received from most people living in the United States. Binney talks about Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act and challenges NSA Director Keith Alexander’s assertion that the NSA is not intercepting information about U.S. citizens. This interview is part of a 5-part special on growing state surveillance.
Former NSA and CIA director General Michael Hayden stood on the pulpit of a church across from the White House on Sunday and declared Gmail the preferred online service of terrorists. As part of an adult education forum at St. John’s Episcopal Church, Hayden gave a wide ranging speech on "the tension between security and liberty."
At one point, Hayden expressed a distaste for online anonymity, saying “The problem I have with the Internet is that it’s anonymous.”
During the speech, he specifically defended Section 702 of the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act (FISA), which provides the legal basis for the PRISM program. In doing so, Hayden claimed "Gmail is the preferred Internet service provider of terrorists worldwide," presumably meaning online service rather than the actual provider of Internet service.
U.S. Senators Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Mark Udall (D-Colo.) issued the following statement regarding reports that the NSA has violated rules intended to protect Americans' privacy thousands of times each year. Wyden and Udall are both members of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
“The executive branch has now confirmed that the 'rules, regulations and court-imposed standards for protecting the privacy of Americans' have been violated thousands of times each year. We have previously said that the violations of these laws and rules were more serious than had been acknowledged, and we believe Americans should know that this confirmation is just the tip of a larger iceberg.
While Senate rules prohibit us from confirming or denying some of the details in today's press reports, the American people have a right to know more details about of these violations. We hope that the executive branch will take steps to publicly provide more information as part of the honest, public debate of surveillance authorities that the Administration has said it is interested in having.
In particular, we believe the public deserves to know more about the violations of the secret court orders that have authorized the bulk collection of Americans' phone and email records under the USA PATRIOT Act. The public should also be told more about why the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has said that the executive branch's implementation of section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act has circumvented the spirit of the law, particularly since the executive branch has declined to address this concern.
We appreciate the candor of the Chief Judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court regarding the Court's inability to independently verify statements made by the executive branch. We believe that the Court is not currently structured in a way that makes it an effective check on the power of the executive branch. This highlights the need for a robust and well-staffed public advocate who could participate in significant cases before the Court and evaluate and counter government assertions. Without such an advocate on the court, and without greater transparency regarding the Court's rulings, the checks and balances on executive branch authority enshrined in the Constitution cannot be adequately upheld.” http://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-r...ection-programs
Thursday, May 26, 2011 Washington, D.C. – Speaking on the floor of the U.S Senate during the truncated debate on the reauthorization of the PATRIOT ACT for another four years, U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) – a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence -- warned his colleagues that a vote to extend the bill will cause public outrage.
Senator Wyden says, "I have served on the Intelligence Committee for a decade, and I want to deliver a warning this afternoon: when the American people find out how their government has secretly interpreted the Patriot Act, they will be stunned and they will be angry. And they will be asking senators, “Did you know what this law actually permits?” “Why didn’t you know before you voted on it?” The fact is that anyone can read the plain text of the Patriot Act, and yet many members of Congress have no idea how the law is being secretly interpreted by the executive branch, because that interpretation is classified."
"Do not call conspiracy everything this people calls a conspiracy; do not fear what they fear, and do not dread it. The Lord Almighty is the one you are to regard as holy, he is the one you are to fear, he is the one you are to dread." Isaiah 8:12-13 (New International Version) http://www.biblestudytools.com/isaiah/passage.aspx?q=isaiah+8:12-13
agree that my access and use of the MaleSurvivor discussion forums and
chat room is subject to the terms of this Agreement. AND the sole
discretion of MaleSurvivor. I agree that my use of MaleSurvivor
resources are AT-WILL,
and that my posting privileges may be terminated at any time, and for
any reason by MaleSurvivor.