Tuesday, May 16, 2006

Why I Call the Conspiracy Believers Nutbars

I'm not going to cut you a break on this point. You want to be respected for your conspiracy theories, but you're accusing hundreds if not thousands of people in the US government and elsewhere of complicity in a plot to murder 3000 +/- American citizens on 9-11.

Now, if your conspiracy theory is something less than LIHOP, or MIHOP, you may already not be a nutbar. You can argue Flight 93 was shot down without being a nut; I'd disagree because I know how complicated even that would be, but that's a relatively reasonable conspiracy. I'd argue you're wrong, but you're certainly not a nut.

You can argue CD on WTC 7 without assuming monsters in the White House--argue, anyway, since a real CD would take a lot longer to plan and execute. But let's say that it's around 1:00 PM, and there's concern that WTC 7, which has sustained significant damage, might fall towards the rescuers, and so they get Jiffy Demo in there to plant some charges.

Well, you know the problem with both those scenarios, right? There's nothing in there to get angry about the Bush Administration about, so they never would have hid them.

But if you believe those conspiracy theories you are not a nutbar.

For the rest, if the wrapper fits, wear it. Console yourself that if it's ever proven that the Bush Administration was in on the job, I'll be the one calling for neck stretchings for everybody involved, except Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, right Don, errr, I mean James?

19 Comments:

At 17 May, 2006 00:42, Blogger BG said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 17 May, 2006 00:53, Blogger BG said...

Pat,

You and James continue to miss the point. You are MISSING THE POINT. Ok, one more time: you are missing the point.

Regardless of what particular individual or groups of individuals you decide to use as your straw men, I ask everyone to get some perspective here: No one, I mean no one has assassinated a govt. official because they believed that govt. official was responsible for 9/11. Except for possibly a tiny handful of people, no one has called privately or publicly for attacks, vigilante style.

No one is rioting. No one is calling for violence. Given the rate of mental illness ambient in the population, just the facts cited above are no small pototoes.

No one is calling for hanging or otherwise rough justice without due process.

Let's look at exactly where we are today. After Pearl Harbor a Commission to study the calamity was established 7 days after the event.
How many days after 9/11 did we get the 9/11 Commission? Who was under oath during questioning? Who was Philip Zelikow, the Exec. Director of the Commission? What Pres. wanted to have his VP as his side during questioning? (Or was it the VP who insisted he be there?)

So, now, it's almost 5 years later, we received a Commission Report that was a sham and a fraud. We have rampant corruption scandal with convicted felons related to our mililtary industrial complex. We have documented murder from a few years ago (Guy Bolis, Sun Cruz Casinos) who happened to a business associate of Jack Abramoff.

We have faked evidence (Atta's torn passport ) (much more) in NYC. We have a crash site in PA that makes less sense today than it did on 9/11. We have Mainstream Media who won't deal with the real facts and concerns of 9/11. We have a video released today that is meaningless. We have NIST still trying to hire a subcontractor to study what happened to WTC 7.

In general there are a goodly number American citizens who still want answers. Some of us may have speculated about alternative facts of the crime of 9/11. Some of us may suspect there may be guilty parties within the US Govt. Almost without exception we are motivated by the idea that American was founded on principals such as Justice, due process, and Truth.

Sure, you are free to criticize Loose Change. You are free to think some allegations made in Loose Change, or in books, or on web sites are off-base, and you are free to speak out against what you see as false allegations.

At some point though, I simply can't believe you won't support the right for a huge amount of your fellow Americans getting a fair hearing. As I have said before, this gets to be a moral issue. I defy you to tell me you really don't see the need for further legitimate inquiry.

Yet, here you continue, using the same techniques used by goons to smear reasonable people who represent the best appeal to decency and honor that America has to offer.

On the whole, the people you so gleefully are calling nuts are the few that will not stand for a society to be curmudgeoned into Orwellian social control based on lies and terror by our Government.

 
At 17 May, 2006 01:30, Blogger nesNYC said...

For the rest, if the wrapper fits, wear it. Console yourself that if it's ever proven that the Bush Administration was in on the job, I'll be the one calling for neck stretchings for everybody involved, except Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, right Don, errr, I mean James?

You guys must be young. Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld ARE the problem more than just Bush. You should do a little reading on Iran/Contra and see who the key players in that were and how it lines up perfectly with 9/11. Although 9/11 might have been planned and implemented in only a few years time, the actual plan for conquest goes back a lot farther.

 
At 17 May, 2006 03:03, Blogger dilbert_g said...

DUDES.

Cool Paul Isaac video post.

Hunt the Boeing (Left Frenchy), In Plane Site (mild Christian Right with some extreme right guests), and Loose Change (hip techno-agey) were ALL DEBUNKED YEARS AGO .... by serious 9-11 researchers. see below

Even some FAKE "poison pill" 9-11 Researchers debunked that crap.

Loose Change DOES put in SOME valid stuff -- like Marvin Bush, Bush family Nazi connection (which is really LESS a family Nazi connection than a political dynasty going fwd from Allen Dulles, Bush's grandpa's boss, long story) and other things, but the BIG VISUAL parts are either WRONG or BAD LOGIC or possible-but-unproven.

Loose Change is a thick slurry of mix-and-match bullshit, with some accurate facts.

When people were debunking those, some predicted that it would be used to smear legitimate 9-11 research. After arguing with von Kleist, they called him "might as well be CIA, for the smokescreen he's making". They predicted that Rumsfeld's "Freudian slip" about the missile was a trap. It was. And of course Pop Mechanics, by Chertoff's brother, which focused primarily on the "Pod" and "No Plane" issues.

THERE IS SO MUCH MORE, it's really a closed case, but the media has purposedly ignored it so they can "debunk" the garbage. The media did it similar with JFK, floated a bunch of conflicting bullshit, CIA even had it's own authors. It's deep.

Ruppert is held up by some, debunked by others (over Peak Oil) (which seems untrue + irrelevant), but at least he covered "The Grand Chessboard", written by the founder of Al-Qaeda.

Others copy good info, then slide it in next to UFOs or Tabloid gay scandals, and other whacky stuff. George Galloway got an antiwar movement behind him in Britain looking all diplo in the Senate, then went on TV dressed in leotards.

Look, I'm not saying "hey these guys are wrong, but I'm right". I've done ZERO original research of the buildings or anything. All I've done is compare many people's arguments, combined with what I know and learned about deeper US history. Like the Fascist Coup attempt of 1933.

Hey, if you are not just some LGF copycat and you really DO want to know more about Loose Change vs. some other credible people, go to

www.Takeoverworld.info/disinfo.html

because I think I have links to all the good people, plus my own editorial "boil-it-down" or clarifications (and I'm slowly putting up disclaimers on the rest, still learning)
and I put up a link to your blog there too.

Peace

 
At 17 May, 2006 05:08, Blogger Alex said...

Dilbert:

The problem with your line of argument is that no matter how many theories we debunk, there will always be someone claiming to have "the REAL story". Take yours for example. Here's some tips:

1) If you organize your website a bit better, you won't look like such a freak. Random facts, strange quotes, and a massive ammount of links all thrown on one page at random is the hallmark of the whacked-out nut-job. Organization is a key skill. If you can't organize your thoughts on a web-page, chances are they're not very well organized in your head either.

2) Get off the Northwoods train. As eeeevil as Northwoods may seem, it was obviously designed to avoid loss of life in general, and loss of American civilian lives especially. Contrast that with 9/11 which killed 3,000 innocent Americans, and right away you can tell we're talking about two totaly different types of operations, not to mention two totaly different mindsets between the planners. Northwoods could be planned, and maybe even executed, with the majority of those involved being able to convince themselves that it was for the good of America. There's no way however that anyone except the most delusional of freaks could convince themselves that 3,000 civilian deaths was a good thing.

3) Get off the " the Bush Family sucked off Hitler" train. Or whatever the popular accusation is these days. The links between the Bush family and the German regime are so insubstantial as to be non-existant. Even if you could prove that Bush's grandfather was close personal friends with the Fuhrer himself, it doesn't tell us anything about George W. Hell, one of MY grandfathers was a war criminal, which I'm sure would be brought up if I ever ran for political office, but I've yet to feel any urge to commit mass murder.

I did like this quote from your website though:

"Political Physics: For every PhD, there is an equal and opposite PhD"

If I may be allowed to add a little wit of my own:

"For every conspiracy theory, there is an equal and opposite conspiracy theory"

That's what makes arguing with you people so useless. You can't even agree with eachother most of the time.

 
At 17 May, 2006 07:46, Blogger James B. said...

And of course Pop Mechanics, by Chertoff's brother, which focused primarily on the "Pod" and "No Plane" issues.


Thus far I have seen him called his brother, his cousin, his nephew and his uncle. What is next, his mother? Well hey, obviously people with the same last name must be related right? In fact I think George W. Bush and Reggie Bush are brothers.

 
At 17 May, 2006 07:50, Blogger JoanBasil said...

Pat,
I guess the point really is that its not about us. 9/11 was the most important historical event in our lifetimes and we shouldn't have to be coming up with theories about how WTC 7 fell. These are very serious events that should have been investigated seriously and they weren't. You have that video down page about Philip Zelikow being confronted by Gypsy Taub and what he is saying about these 19 men penetrating our systems by studying them is ridiculous. They couldn't do a convincing impersonation of someone who really wanted to learn to fly.

The first thing that bothered me about the 9/11 official version was our government and media glomming onto the "Flight 93 heroes" story based on - what? - a second hand snipped of information? Mrs. Beamer thinking her husband said "Let's roll" and the phone operator heard that? It seemed so unserious to jump on that and construct that entire story and even use it in the State of the Union address.

 
At 17 May, 2006 08:04, Blogger Good Lieutenant said...

Wow. Set the tinfoil hats to DefCon 5 -"The Bush Admin. is a bunch of Mass-Murdering Criminals who would kill thousands of their fellow citizens to win elections/get oil/oppress the masses..."

Keep huffing and hyperventalating, nutbars. For all of your unfounded nonsense, you can't agree with each other, with the government, with the American people, with your fellow propagandist filmmakers, with the plethora video footage countering and hilighting the fallacy and insanity of your claims, logistics experts, victim's families, NYPD, NYFD, NORAD, SSCI, Popular Science, etc.

But I digress - I am the one who has the REAL story regarding the events of September 11, and its relationship to your proposed "theories."

The truth is that the believers posting here are indeed (as this site and hundreds of other government and non-government sources confirm) a gaggle of unhinged, black-helicopter-seeing mouthbreathers suffering from mass denial while inhaling the fumes of ignorance and anti-Americanism like it was your cocaine.

Truthout indeed.

 
At 17 May, 2006 08:59, Blogger nesNYC said...

Contrast that with 9/11 which killed 3,000 innocent Americans, and right away you can tell we're talking about two totaly different types of operations

Yeah right! The supposed "hijackers" struck the WTC in the 8 o'clock hour when people were just getting to work. The buildings where at capacity, yet. Also, they hit the part of the Pentagon that wasn't at full capacity either because of the "renovations." Factor in that the passenger lists have all the planes in transcontinental flight only 25% full, and you're talking about a very striking similarity to Northwood. Had these "Terrorists" decided to strike right before noon, then the death toll would in the tens of thousands.

Additionally, one of the WTC planes trajectories took it right by Indian Point Nuclear plant. Had these "Jihadists" actually wanted to take out all of NYC and the surrounding area, all they had to do was crash there, why didn't they?

Same kind of operation, same motives as Northwood and probably aided in part by the Joint Chiefs themselves.

 
At 17 May, 2006 09:25, Blogger nesNYC said...

no way however that anyone except the most delusional of freaks could convince themselves that 3,000 civilian deaths was a good thing.

Perl Harbor killed in excess of 2k Americans and proved the US had foreknowledge. This was the pretext to get her into WW2.

The "new" Perl Harbor (as described by PNAC in 2000) was used as the pretext to get the US to invade Afghanistan, Iraq and soon, Iran in the new world war also known as "The war on terror." Also, PNAC and the Israeli criminals involved in creating the policy paper "A clean break" have outlined to take Syria, Saudi Arabia and virtually ALL oil producing Arab countries.

But the real motive and why many can be convinced to be a part of such a monstrous operation is that the US economy and practically the dollar were set to expire sometime within the next 10 years. Inflationary pressure and dollar devaluation and its subsequent collapse will take it from the world stage as a world reserve currency. There will be a panic and most of the world's economy will be in ruins. At that time a new commodity based currency will emerge and it will be based on gold and oil. How handy is it then that the US is currently confiscating and consolidating all that oil in the hands of a very few?

Had no action been taken, the US and world economies would plunge into a global depression of which global anarchy would ensue and the current status quo in danger of being replaced. That is the reason why these monsters did what they did. It was to keep that 1% that owns 90% of the wealth steadfastly in control regardless of the consequences.

This is all outlined in Zbigniew Brzezinski's book "The Grand Chessboard" on wich PNAC is based. Do yourselves a favor and read that book. It predates 9/11 and shows exactly why the US in the areas it is in. By the end of the book, you'll realize that the Middle East isn't the only place where these "interventions" will occur. What's frightening about this book is that it calls for active control of Russia and China; it is written by a mad man and those are exactly the policies that this and future US administrations will adhere to. Any rational individual comes away with the conclusion that Brzezinski and PNAC are calling for instigation with Russia and China a.k.a. WW4. 9/11 was simply the spark that will ignite that time bomb.

 
At 17 May, 2006 09:27, Blogger BG said...

James B.,

Your point about PM and Chertoff is well taken.

If I'm able to pick who is going to be on my team to speak the truth, I'd do everything possible to keep Dilbert off the team.

 
At 17 May, 2006 09:34, Blogger nesNYC said...

The first thing that bothered me about the 9/11 official version was our government and media glomming onto the "Flight 93 heroes" story based on - what? - a second hand snipped of information? Mrs. Beamer thinking her husband said "Let's roll" and the phone operator heard that? It seemed so unserious to jump on that and construct that entire story and even use it in the State of the Union address.

Goebbels would be proud. This is pure unadulterated PROPAGANDA.

 
At 17 May, 2006 10:08, Blogger undense said...

Additionally, one of the WTC planes trajectories took it right by Indian Point Nuclear plant. Had these "Jihadists" actually wanted to take out all of NYC and the surrounding area, all they had to do was crash there, why didn't they?

It wouldn't "take out all of NYC and the surrounding area." Studies have been done of an attack on Indian Point. The death toll would depend on the weather at the time but even the worst case scenario claims 100,000 near-term deaths and 500,000 long-term deaths. Of course, this scenario is presented by a professional group that has an odor of anti-nuke activism about them, so take those numbers with a grian of salt, as they could be a bit overstated.

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_security/nuclear_terrorism/impacts-of-a-terrorist-attack-at-indian-point-nuclear-power-plant.html

Additionally, the numbers provided in the study are based on a core-meltdown. afaik, nuclear reactor cores are designed to withstand a direct impact from a 747 without a core meltdown occurring. A 757, which is much smaller, likely wouldn't make a dent. Maybe the jihadists knew this already?

 
At 17 May, 2006 12:27, Blogger nesNYC said...

Additionally, the numbers provided in the study are based on a core-meltdown.

All that really needed to happen in this case was to disrupt the cooling system of the core. The core need not be targeted directly. If you'll note the construction of a nuke plant, the majority of it is dedicated to keeping that core cool. Any crash of any plane in the near vicinity could have easily accomplished this. BTW, if not contained, NYC would have to be evacuated. That's a fact.

Chernobyl on the Hudson?

 
At 17 May, 2006 12:33, Blogger nesNYC said...

From the same article you posted:

We find that, depending on the weather conditions, an attack could result in as many as 44,000 near-term deaths from acute radiation syndrome or as many as 518,000 long-term deaths from cancer among individuals within fifty miles of the plant. These findings confirm that Indian Point poses a severe threat to the entire New York metropolitan area.

 
At 17 May, 2006 14:03, Blogger undense said...

All that really needed to happen in this case was to disrupt the cooling system of the core. The core need not be targeted directly. If you'll note the construction of a nuke plant, the majority of it is dedicated to keeping that core cool. Any crash of any plane in the near vicinity could have easily accomplished this. BTW, if not contained, NYC would have to be evacuated. That's a fact.

Umm, no. That's not a fact.

I've been in engineering for almost 20 years and can safely say that you have no clue about nuclear reactors. It takes more than simply knocking out the cooling system to cause a core meltdown. Do some research on how control rods function in a standard reactor design, then get back to me.

From the same article you posted:

snip


Right, which doesn't back up what you said previously. Try again. Or don't, because you're simply wrong no matter how you try to respin your claim.

 
At 20 May, 2006 07:10, Blogger sumy23 said...

If you notice who posts on here its mainly just a core of trusted people.

This blog is for defending corruption.

If you post any real info on this blog they will just delete your post. They really only encourage weak info. Anything that they can't debunk gets deleted. Dont waste your time here.

 
At 22 May, 2006 05:17, Blogger Nielad said...

Hey Pat, it's OK, stop fretting. There isn't anyway your one track mind can explain all the lies of the government. Stop misconveying what some theorists believe. I highly doubt thousands were involved, most were probably manipulated. Thank God this blog isn't intelligent enough to worry about.

 
At 17 September, 2008 10:28, Blogger Shane said...

I agree to disagree and disagree to agree on many things... LOL!

To the original poster:

There are many things here I do agree with you about. However, as a former senior member of the ASCE, NYC Housing and Zoning Commission, a former fire safety inspector from American Home Fire Safety, and Atlantic City, NJ fire marshall... I must say this:

There are several key scientific facts being ignored (in most cases I feel willfully by many and just ignorantly by most) with the happenings surrounding 9/11.

Fact: the WTC buildings were supposedly brought down by subsonic passenger aircraft (Boeing 767) damage, caused through impact and the following fuel fire.

Fact: The WTC buildings were conceived by Skidmor, Owings and Merill, designed by John Skilling and Minoru Yamasaki (architect), and Emery Roth and Sons (co-architects). Finally construction was overseen by the New York Port Authority's Engineering Department (and they also laid the foundation) and the Tishman Construction Company was charged with the building task (there were many others as well but lets not get into all that).

Fact: The WTC Twin Towers project raised such a concern about the height and safety that the drafters of the plan took several scenarios into account.

Fact: The conceptual design board (hired and financed by David Rockefeller) designed the buildings in such a way that;

A. One side of the buildings support structures could be completely destroyed and the corners of two other sides wiped out, and the building would still have enough structural integrity to hold up even against 100+mph winds.

B. Due to the extreme height of the buildings, the threat of an airplane crash WAS thought of and prepared for, they devised a plan to prepare the building by simulating, and thus anticipating, a crash with a Boeing 707 and DC 8 (348,000 and 352,000lbs) airliners at a 607mph cruise speed impact.

C. They then thought, what if the likely fuel fire occurred and how do we prevent it from causing enough damage to the structure that could possibly enable upper level collapse?

D. Then the idea arose, what if someone we're to try to bomb the building for a ransom other terror purpose?

E. Acting on these thoughts they proceeded to create a pillar system so sound that one half of the structure could be cut in half, or collapse, and the remaining pillars could still support 2,000% the buildings own weight! Only one corner and 1/3 of the structure would need to remain for the building to soundly stand.

F. The Towers were considered by the industry leading engineering authorities to be 1600% sturdier than conventional steel structures.

G. For this, ASCE presented an award for the buildings soundness and said that, "it is the example of the greatest engineering skills, progress, and contribution in all of mankind!"

Fact: NO steel superstructure, in the history of the world, has ever fallen, due to fire or natural disaster, ever before, in the history of society.

Fact: Only strategic controlled demolitions, have proven effective in the removal of any steel superstructures in history.

Counter Fact: Though the Boeing 767 does weigh in at a whopping 395,000lbs (undeniably a cause for severe damage to a structure at flight speeds of 235+mph), it is constructed of Grumman Aluminum and is designed to crumple on impact to absorb shock.

Counter Fact: The Boeing 767 does carry a payload of 24,000gals of fuel (which would undeniably, burn quite a bit for quite a long time), a fuel fire maintains a temperature between 1600 and 1750 degrees F at flashpoint (the period of time a fire is hottest and the oxygen in the air becomes so hot and flammable that everything in the area can instantly combust, provided its combustion point is lower than the given heat source) . The melting point of the steel I-beams used in the construction of the WTC Towers shell, structure, and supports (housed in thick concrete a poor conductor of heat might I add) is between 2600 and 2800 degrees F. Thereby negating any claim that the trailing fires further weakened the structure (possibly, that's a big possibly, a little, but not enough to incur collapse).

Counter Fact: There was only reported a mild breeze on September 11th, 2001.

Counter Fact: Though jet fuel is highly explosive in nature, airliners wings are designed to "pour out" the fuel in a safer slow burning manner in case of severe impact. Very rarely will a passenger plane, "explode in a chaotic ball of destruction," because if it did, every time a plane had to emergency land, they would explode and everyone would die, everytime (if not every time, 90% of the time) instead of the rare 1.8% chance that if your plane should crash, will it explode. Undeniably, that day could have been possible that this was one of those, less than, one in fifty odds.

Interesting Fact: Larry Silverstein a real estate purchased the WTC for 'pennies on a dollar,' a $7billion dollar appraised (yet 1/3 pre-condemned property, with estimated $16+billion worth of renovations and asbestos clean-up to be done to bring it up to code) structure for a total final cost of about $500,000 in deposit and payments.

Question: Why would a real estate mogul make an obvious blind purchase of a dead investment?

Interesting Fact: Larry Silverstein, the real estate mogul that owned the WTC complex, did in fact take out a high yeild $4billion insurance claim on WTC, with emphasis on the protection "against acts of terrorism," ever so conveniently, only 6 months before.

Interesting Fact: BBC did air a broadcast claiming the WTC7 tower fell in proximity of 20 minutes before so, my wife recorded the live broadcast, which has been downplayed as a hoax or hysteria by popular media, even though hundreds of thousands of people paid witness to it.

Interesting Fact: Hundreds of (insane) New Yorkers have (and tried to sell to the press and were repeatedly denied) photos and video of the second flight that clearly is military gray, with no windows rear of the cockpit, and having a round blue and red insignia clearly visible but not 100% identifiable (unfortunately, many answers would be made there) which is also quite similar to that found on RAF (Royal Air Force, UK) aircraft. I have seen many of these pictures and talked with many of these people personally, and I must say, I don't believe they were lying, and as a photographic hobbyist and now Graphic Arts business owner... In my professional opinion, "I don't believe they are faked."

Interesting Fact: NORAD, since its inception, has had a 100% success rate in intercepting any and all aircraft that have gone off course and failed to report within 8 to 10 minutes of initial flight course breaks, if no contact is made, military inceptors are immediately scrambled to investigate with executive permission to use deadly force if thought to be necessary.

Question: Why then after 80+ minutes off course, did we continue to track these aircraft but did not attempt to burst transmission or intercept after radio contact had been broken? Were all of our boys on vacation or was there an executive order to hold? This of course, is a semi-allegation without much more substance other than the fishiness of the lack of response... but still, it does make you think.

There are still so many more facts, but unfortunately I am now behind and need to get to work. I am not in any way saying that the president or his family are involved or bad people. I can neither approve or disprove that. But the facts that there was something terrible that happened, and unless every single American official involved dropped the ball in unison, and every possible negative occurred in the luck of things at once, and the darkest of odds were just against us all in a fashion as if we had directly incurred the wrath of God himself... Unless that is how it happened, something is undeniably not right.

Thus I think all would agree, if there was nothing to hide, then an investigation should have taken place.

Fast Fact: Usama Bin Laden is the supposed Al Qaeda terrorist behind this all, yet his name isn't brought up for charging (check the FBI's Top Ten Most Wanted Terrorists list on their official website. Bin Laden #1, click his mug, read why... Hmmm a bombing on an embassy in Africa, Bomb bomb, murder murder, conspiracy to commit and act of terrorism... Nothing about the WTC, 9/11, anything, just a sub-note saying that he is an alleged suspect.)? In a democracy with law (U.S.) you are supposed to be brought up on charges, an arrest warrant issued, sought out, found, arrested, then tried before a jury of your peers... Yet, no due process of law has taken place. Why?

Interesting Fact: If the zoning commission knew that an asbestos clean-up was needed in the towers, then why did we send so many first responders, police, fire, emergency, and volunteer workers in to help, saying, "the air is safe to breathe?" Now we have hundreds possibly thousands of people that came to help, true American patriots, that are sick, disabled, dying, or dead... And our government isn't even helping them with medications or treatment? That is terrible.

Last thought, why did our government use this as a staging point to create and enforce, many laws deemed unconstitutional (eg. NDAA 2006, MCA 2006, NSPD-51, HR-1955, COPE Act or HR-5252, etc... Look these up on the Lirary of Congress's website)? Laws violating our rights, saying that illegal search and seizure is legal when the government thinks so, unlawfully occupying your house or taking your personal property is lawful when deemed, denying you your civil liberty is lawful when deemed, arresting you without probable cause and detaining you indefinitely without chance of trial is lawful when deemed, interrogating/torturing/ & executing you without cause is lawful when deemed, wiretapping you/eves-dropping/ & reading your mail/e-mail is lawful when deemed, forcing you to spy on your neighbors is lawful when deemed, dispatching military in the place of peace officers in domestic cases is lawful when deemed, shipping you to a detention camp is lawful when deemed... and much much much more... Read the laws, listen with your American heart, and think.

Thinking isn't illegal yet, but they are attempting to police the mind... and it is all in the spirit of, "what's in your best interests."

I'm no conspiracy theorist, and have no opinions on these matters, but the FACTS are clear that something is amiss.

Thanks for your time with my rather long rant. Don't be lazy and investigate... Please, never take anyone's word for it, not mine or anyone else's!

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home