|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
shakuhachi
Joined: 08 Feb 2003
Location: Sydney
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 3:33 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Ruby Ridge/Waco disasters: Federal Law Enforcement officers are jack-booted Nazis. (as charged by the National Rifle Association, Rush Limbaugh, and the anti-government redneck crowd) |
At the least, the Ruby Ridge incident strikes me as a mammoth government mess up, and at worst, heavy handed and trigger-happy. It should be remember that weaver, the white separitist, just wanted to be left alone, but the government was determined to recruit him as an informant, which led to the incident. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[deleted]
Last edited by Gopher on Sun Jun 11, 2006 12:04 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Ruby Ridge/Waco disasters: Federal Law Enforcement officers are jack-booted Nazis. (as charged by the National Rifle Association, Rush Limbaugh, and the anti-government redneck crowd) |
A LOT more people than simply Rush Limbaugh & NRA fans who agree Ruby Ridge & WACO smack of the worst kind of fascism.
btw - you forgot to ad the FIRST attempted destruction ( with the FBI's help ) of the WTC and the official cover-up, lies & deception surrounding Oklahoma City.
| Quote: |
| At the least, the Ruby Ridge incident strikes me as a mammoth government mess up, and at worst, heavy handed and trigger-happy. It should be remember that weaver, the white separitist, just wanted to be left alone, but the government was determined to recruit him as an informant, which led to the incident. |
| Quote: |
| Ruby Ridge/Waco disasters: Federal Law Enforcement officers are jack-booted Nazis. (as charged by the National Rifle Association, Rush Limbaugh, and the anti-government redneck crowd) |
| Quote: |
They weren't conspiracies, however. And Janet Reno  explained clearly enough that she had info that the Branch Dividians were abusing their children, that is, molesting or something like that. |
Interesting logick. We "suspect" there are those among their ranks who are molesting thier poor children, so let's move in & burn the whole place down.
| Quote: |
| They guy at Ruby Ridge was a rabid antigoverment/militia person in possession of sawed-off shotguns who refused to surrender to the authorities. |
And as pointed out, he refused to join gov't ranks in their attempt to "recruit" him, so they shot his wife in the forehead while she held a baby in her arms out on the steps of their cabin.
Yah, GO TEAM !!!
Real heroes every last one of them |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 4:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Harpeau wrote: |
| I don't think the U.S. gov. has been totally honest with what has happenend on 9/11. I believe that from the evidence that I've looked at that there have been bombs placed in the 3 World Trade Centre buildings. |
Indeed ...
And you're clearly not alone here either.
Re: 9/11, the majority of Americans now suspect the orchestration of high-level insider complicity
& execution of a whitewash cover-up.
Sheen's Historic Interview w/ Jones
One of the major events he calls into question is the controlled demolition of WTC#7.
http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/sheen_questions_official_911_story_audio.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| some waygug-in wrote: |
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060322133637223
FBI Headquarters Thwarts Pre-9/11 Moussaoui Search, But Why?
March 22, 2006
Here are two articles on the Moussaoui trial, with testimony from one of those 'spun up' FBI agents in Minneapolis who couldn't get FBI headquarters to sign on to searching Moussaoui's laptop in August 2001.
What is striking about agent Samit's account, like the account of his office-mate Coleen Rowley, is the assumption of "criminal negligence" on the part of FBI headquarters, and RFU head David Frasca and Michael Maltbie in particular. Best I can see, criminal complicity has not been ruled out whatsoever.
I'm grateful for the testimony of Mr. Samit, and for Rowley's whistleblowing, but how exactly can either know for sure that the RFU's obstructionism was the result of careerism or 'criminal incompetence' rather than something else? I don't claim to know the reasons, but Samit and Rowley certainly cannot know for sure, either. |
| Quote: |
Please stop sending me those emails. You know who are. And you know what emails I mean ... Okay, I'll spell it out -- those forwarded emails suggesting, or flat-out stating, the CIA and the U.S. government were somehow involved in the horrific September 11 attacks.
There are emails about a fellow imprisoned in Canada who claims to be a former U.S. intelligence office and who supposedly passed advance warning of the attack to jail guards in mid-August. There are emails, citing an Italian newspaper, reporting that last July Osama bin Laden was treated for kidney disease at the American hospital in Dubai and met with a CIA official. There are the emails, referring to a book published in France, that note the attacks came a month after Bush Administration officials, who were negotiating an oil deal with the Taliban, told the Afghans "either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs."
Get the hint? Washington either did nothing to stop the September 11 attacks or plotted the assaults so a justifiable war could then be waged against Afghanistan to benefit Big Oil.
One email I keep receiving is a timeline of so-called suspicious events that "establishes CIA foreknowledge of [the September 11 attacks] and strongly suggests that there was criminal complicity on the part of the U.S. government in their execution."
I won't argue that the U.S. government does not engage in brutal, murderous skulduggery from time to time. But the notion that the U.S. government either detected the attacks but allowed them to occur, or, worse, conspired to kill thousands of Americans to launch a war-for-oil in Afghanistan is absurd. Still, each week emails passing on such tripe arrive. This crap is probably not worth a rational rebuttal, but I'm irritated enough to try.
It's a mug's game to refute individual pieces of conspiracy theories. Who can really know if anything that bizarre happened at a Dubai hospital? As for the man jailed in Canada, he was being held on a credit card fraud charge, and the only source for the story about his warning was his own word. The judge in his case said, "There is no independent evidence to support his colossal allegations." But a conspiracy-monges can reply, wouldn't you expect the government and its friends in Canada to say that?
So let's start with a broad question: would U.S. officials be capable of such a foul deed? Capable -- as in able to pull it off and willing to do so. Simply put, the spies and special agents are not good enough, evil enough, or gutsy enough to mount this operation. That conclusion is based partly on, dare I say it, common sense, but also on years spent covering national security matters. (For a book I wrote on the CIA, I interviewed over 100 CIA officials and employees.)
Not good enough: Such a plot -- to execute the simultaneous destruction of the two towers, a piece of the Pentagon, and four airplanes and make it appear as if it all was done by another party -- is far beyond the skill level of U.S. intelligence. It would require dozens (or scores or hundreds) of individuals to attempt such a scheme. They would have to work together, and trust one another not to blow their part or reveal the conspiracy. They would hail from an assortment of agencies (CIA, FBI, INS, Customs, State, FAA, NTSB, DOD, etc.).
Yet anyone with the most basic understanding of how government functions (or does not function) realizes that the various bureaucracies of Washington -- particularly those of the national security "community" -- do not work well together. Even covering up advance knowledge would require an extensive plot. If there truly had been intelligence reports predicting the 9/11 attacks, these reports would have circulated through intelligence and policymaking circles before the folks at the top decided to smother them for geopolitical gain. That would make for a unwieldy conspiracy of silence. And in either scenario -- planning the attacks or permitting them to occur -- everyone who participated in the conspiracy would have to be freakin' sure that all the other plotters would stay quiet.
Not evil enough. This is as foul as it gets -- to kill thousands of Americans, including Pentagon employees, to help out oil companies. (The sacrificial lambs could have included White House staff or members of Congress, had the fourth plane not crashed in Pennsylvania.) This is a Hollywood-level of dastardliness, James Bond (or Dr. Evil) material.
Are there enough people of such a bent in all those agencies? That's doubtful. CIA officers and American officials have been evildoers. They have supported death squads and made use of drug dealers overseas. They have assisted torturers, disseminated assassination manuals, sold weapons to terrorist-friendly governments, undermined democratically-elected governments, and aided dictators who murder and maim. They have covered up reports of massacres and human rights abuses. They have plotted to kill foreign leaders.
These were horrendous activities, but, in most instances, the perps justified these deeds with Cold War imperatives (perverted as they were). And to make the justification easier, the victims were people overseas. Justifying the murder of thousands of Americans to help ExxonMobil would require U.S. officials to engage in a different kind of detachment and an even more profound break with decency and moral norms.
I recall interviewing one former CIA official who helped manage a division that ran the sort of actions listed above, and I asked him whether the CIA had considered "permanently neutralizing" a former CIA man who had revealed operations and the identities of CIA officers. Kill an American citizen? he replied, as if I were crazy to ask. No, no, he added, we could never do that. Yes, in the spy-world some things were beyond the pale. And, he explained, it would be far too perilous, for getting caught in that type of nasty business could threaten your career. Which brings us to....
Not gutsy enough. Think of the danger -- the potential danger to the plotters. What if their plan were uncovered before or, worse, after the fact? Who's going to risk being associated with the most infamous crime in U.S. history? At the start of such a conspiracy, no one could be certain it would work and remain a secret. CIA people -- and those in other government agencies -- do care about their careers.
Would George W. Bush take the chance of being branded the most evil president of all time by countenancing such wrongdoing? Oil may be in his blood, but would he place the oil industry's interests ahead of his own? (He sure said sayonara to Kenneth Lay and Enron pretty darn fast.) And Bush and everyone else in government know that plans leak. Disinformation specialists at the Pentagon could not keep their office off the front page of The New York Times. In the aftermath of September 11, there has been much handwringing over the supposed fact that U.S. intelligence has been too risk-averse. But, thankfully, some inhibitions -- P.R. concerns, career concerns -- do provide brakes on the spy-crowd.
By now, you're probably wondering why I have bothered to go through this exercise. Aren't these conspiracy theories too silly to address? That should be the case. But, sadly, they do attract people.
A fellow named Michael Ruppert, who compiled that timeline mentioned above, has drawn large crowds to his lectures. He has offered $1000 to anyone who can "disprove the authenticity of any of his source material." Well, his timeline includes that Canadian prisoner's claim and cites the Toronto Star as the source. But Ruppert fails to note that the Star did not confirm the man's account, that the paper reported some observers "wonder if it isn't just the ravings of a lunatic," and that the Star subsequently reported the judge said the tale had "no air of reality." Does that disprove anything? Not 100 percent. There's still a chance that man is telling the truth, right? So I'm not expecting a check.
Conspiracy theories may seem more nuisance than problem. But they do compete with reality for attention. There is plenty to be outraged over without becoming obsessed with X Files-like nonsense. Examples? There's the intelligence services's failure to protect Americans and the lack of criticism of the CIA from elected officials. Or, General Tommy Franks, the commander of military operations in Afghanistan, declaring the commando mis-assault at Hazar Qadam, which resulted in the deaths of fifteen to twenty local Afghans loyal to the pro-U.S. government, was not an intelligence failure. (How can U.S. Special Forces fire at targets they wrongly believe to be Taliban or al Qaeda fighters, end up killing people they did not intend to kill, and the operation not be considered an intelligence failure?) More outrage material? A few months ago, forensic researchers found the remains of people tortured and killed at a base the CIA had established in the 1980s as a training center for the contras. The U.S. ambassador to Honduras at the time is now the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Negroponte.
There are always national security misdeeds to be mad about. They may not be as cinematic in nature as a plot in which shady, unidentified U.S. officials scheme to blow up the World Trade Towers to gain control of an oil pipeline in Central Asia. But dozens of dead Hondurans or twenty or so Afghans wrongly killed ought to provoke anger and protest. In fact, out-there conspiracy theorizing serves the interests of the powers-that-be by making their real transgressions seem tame in comparison. (What's a few dead in Central America, compared to thousands in New York City? Why worry about Negroponte, when unidentified U.S. officials are slaughtering American civilians to trigger war?)
Perhaps there's a Pentagon or CIA office that churns out this material. Its mission: distract people from the real wrongdoing. Now there's a conspiracy theory worth exploring. Doesn't it make sense? Doesn't it all fit together? I challenge anyone to disprove it.
David Corn is the Washington editor of The Nation. |
http://www.alternet.org/story/12536/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| It's a mug's game to refute individual pieces of conspiracy theories. |
But dude, WTC7!!! WTC7!!! WTC7!!!
| Quote: |
| Perhaps there's a Pentagon or CIA office that churns out this material. Its mission: distract people from the real wrongdoing. Now there's a conspiracy theory worth exploring. |
Great read, thanks for posting it.
| Quote: |
| But they do compete with reality for attention. There is plenty to be outraged over without becoming obsessed with X Files-like nonsense. |
Where have I heard that before?
Oh, that's right- IT'S WHAT I KEEP SAYING ON THIS BOARD. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 1:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| But they do compete with reality for attention. There is plenty to be outraged over without becoming obsessed with X Files-like nonsense. |
All too prophetic Chris Carter "nonsense" like the infamous "LONE GUNMAN" episode? Look into it.
Using hijacked airlines as instruments of terror & flying them into strategic locations. Nope, that's right. No one, especially as uninformed as say Condaleeza Rice, ever had any idea ... did they?
Just came at us from right outta the blue
| Harpeau wrote: |
| I don't think the U.S. gov. has been totally honest with what has happenend on 9/11. I believe that from the evidence that I've looked at that there have been bombs placed in the 3 World Trade Centre buildings. |
Indeed ...
And you're clearly not alone here either.
Re: 9/11, the majority of Americans now suspect the orchestration of high-level insider complicity
& execution of a whitewash cover-up.
Sheen's Historic Interview w/ Jones
One of the major events he calls into question is the controlled demolition of WTC#7.
http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/sheen_questions_official_911_story_audio.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| igotthisguitar wrote: |
| Quote: |
| But they do compete with reality for attention. There is plenty to be outraged over without becoming obsessed with X Files-like nonsense. |
All too prophetic Chris Carter "nonsense" like the infamous "LONE GUNMAN" episode? Look into it.
Using hijacked airlines as instruments of terror & flying them into strategic locations. Nope, that's right. No one, especially as uninformed as say Condaleeza Rice, ever had any idea ... did they?
Just came at us from right outta the blue
| Harpeau wrote: |
| I don't think the U.S. gov. has been totally honest with what has happenend on 9/11. I believe that from the evidence that I've looked at that there have been bombs placed in the 3 World Trade Centre buildings. |
Indeed ...
And you're clearly not alone here either.
Re: 9/11, the majority of Americans now suspect the orchestration of high-level insider complicity
& execution of a whitewash cover-up.
Sheen's Historic Interview w/ Jones
One of the major events he calls into question is the controlled demolition of WTC#7.
http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/sheen_questions_official_911_story_audio.htm |
He's not just your run-of-the-mill Hollywood b-list actor. He's also one who has extensive knowledge of the shadowy world of black ops and counter-espionage. He's appeared in a movie titled "Shadow Conspiracy", after all.
Last edited by Hollywoodaction on Fri Mar 31, 2006 2:48 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 4:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hollywoodaction wrote: |
He's not just your run-of-the-mill Hollywood b-list actor. He also one who has extensive knowdledge of the shadowy world of black ops and counter-espionage. He appeared in a movie titled "Shadow Conspiracy",
after all. |
Are you aware your comments entail an AD HOMINEM as well as "Appeal to Authority"?
Why not try sticking to the issues "Hollywood" rather than attacking the speaker?
Then again, maybe you don't really care.
Do you $$ BUY $$$ the govt's official "conspiracy" theory?
http://infowars.com/articles/sept11/sheen_showbiz_sharon_stone.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 2:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| igotthisguitar wrote: |
| Hollywoodaction wrote: |
He's not just your run-of-the-mill Hollywood b-list actor. He also one who has extensive knowdledge of the shadowy world of black ops and counter-espionage. He appeared in a movie titled "Shadow Conspiracy",
after all. |
Are you aware your comments entail an AD HOMINEM as well as "Appeal to Authority"?
Why not try sticking to the issues "Hollywood" rather than attacking the speaker?
Then again, maybe you don't really care.
Do you $$ BUY $$$ the govt's official "conspiracy" theory?
http://infowars.com/articles/sept11/sheen_showbiz_sharon_stone.htm |
Ad hominem? Clearly not. The issues at hand are that he offers no concrete evidence to support his claims and that you seem to give undue weight to them because he's a public figure. The fact that he's an actor certainly brings attention to his soapbox rantings, but it doesn't make his interpretation of the events any more valid the other conspiracy theories. If you continue to believe his unsubstantiated claims for the simple reason that you are star struck, then maybe you should also consider becoming a Scientologist. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 7:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| igotthisguitar wrote: |
Why not try sticking to the issues "Hollywood" rather than attacking the speaker?
|
Do you EVER take time to think before you write this crap?
This is too idiotic, even by your standards- the issue IS the speaker, it's all about who is making headlines now.
Why else would you have changed the name of this thread to "Charlie Sheen Says"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[deleted]
Last edited by Gopher on Sun Jun 11, 2006 12:04 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| You need to get a grip- it's obvious that "Hot Shots: part deux" is what gives Charlie his towering credibility in the conspiracy theory world. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SarcasmKills
Joined: 07 Apr 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bulsajo wrote: |
| You need to get a grip- it's obvious that "Hot Shots: part deux" is what gives Charlie his towering credibility in the conspiracy theory world. |
Umm hellooooo! It's OBVIOUS that he got the scoop by his President-playing father. While Hot Shots did prepare him on the ins and outs of warfare and strategy, getting the scoop from the bowels of the White House (set) from daddy, is surely what enlightened him to this information.
People let's remember, this is CHARLIE SHEEN for f'sake... yet another actor who's ego makes him to believe that everyone wants to lap out any and all bullsheit that spews from his mouth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
