Problem is BOTH will lie... but only one will lie for the right reasons. 

 

I've seen too much fabricated "evidence" far too late for me to be convinced of all this conspiracy theory.  If it wasn't published within a few years of the event, then it has been spun.  Even computer modeling and rendering can be done within that time frame, and was done.  ( I know, I DO that type of thing )

 

The only questions I have are in relation to Enron and building 7?  Too convenient for all that evidence to simply be destroyed.  Now that is where the theory can go ape wild....

From your inflection, is it correct in assuming that Bush lied " for the right reasons"? if so, maybe you could enlighten me as to a few of the "right reasons" for lying to the country? This concept confuses me.This movie itself was produced in your time frame? The modeling was all done by the USG under the normal transparency one has come to expect. The programs, their parameters and the computers they were modeled on have never been released for independent review. And an abundance of the evidence I have encountered is from 2001 to 2004 era, so I am confused to your ‘too late for me’ reference. It doesn’t take much though; to get the (GW modeling) wanted results. Is there some reason you have to believe everything about 9/11, one way or the other? There are many yahoos who will banner any cause against the USG but a question or two is usually enough to know for yourself. It is this simple for me. You either believe the whole story we were fed and in the veracity of the USG … or you don’t. For some reason though many are want to believe everything about 9/11, but will argue in most other cases on how dysfunctional and dishonest the USG is, doesn’t make sense to me?This is the point ... if you can take a big chunk out of the validity of their story and there are massive chunks to be had so at what point do you start questioning the rest of the story? There is no time limitation on murder cases and I believe over 3,000 Americans were murdered that day so why is it too late to uncover something? Surely there is a need to know more than we have been told.

You missed the most important orifice I think, hehehe.

Michael Moore minces everyone's words right and left.

Ok, I  get it that you do not like Moore, welcome to the club, now let's try and get past that point. As long as you are going to go after the messenger and not the message ... well what’s up with that? It has already been established that Moore is an elitist political hack ... several times now. I believe some more credible clips have been presented herein ... have you reviewed any of them or do you just dismiss them out of hand too? No one here has tried to defend Moore himself so what you are doing is just smoke to escape discussing the actual events of 9/11. 

So Moore made so many mistakes huh, 59 of them? I read the list too, is there some reason why you believe this list to be accurate and impeachable? I bet you didn’t actually read the list yourself else even a doubter could throw out many things listed therein.   http://www.davekopel.com/terror/59Deceits.pdf   and if you want a review of the movie that list more than just denials and slams, I would suggest you read this.   http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/001376   Of course this supposes you want to I guess??? You obviously have not looked at the film because he does show and go into the death of our men in harms way??? And what justification can you site that allows you to claim that American military deaths (<5,000) oughtweighs that of innocent Iraqi citizens (>100,000)? I know what you are trying to say, but you said it badly.

FEAR - The greatest propaganda tool ever to be used. The more fear creeps in the more rationality pours out. In other words a little fear goes a long way. As far back as I can remember, we as Americans have been herded through the manipulation of fear. How many years was the “communist threat” used and it never happened. Gosh, they are among our best friends now, go figure. There was the imminent threat from Granada; there was the imminent threat of invasion (?) from Nicaragua, and of course there was the Taliban in Afghanistan that threatened the USG? We all know about al-Qaeda, hum … or do you? Saddam of course was presented as a dire threat to the USG and the world at large and with his al-Qaeda connections and all, but only the patriotic American sheeple believed this. The following clip does a good job of explaining this much better, but I do try, hehehe. I believe 'a clear and present danger' was the term of old.

Actually, you, BoobzTwo, are missing half of my statement, "flatly refuses to show any footage of Iraqi military causalities when they far out weigh the civilian ones, and disrespects the United States military, that fights everyday to keep the United States of America safe, by showing a military funeral and a military amputee without the consent of the family and soldier, respectively." The disrespecting the US military part of my statement goes with what is after it, not with the part before it about Iraq. Michael Moore misrepresents Iraqi military targets as civilian targets, when civilians couldn't go anywhere near those places, the list goes on and on. I did read the entire list of 59 deceits.

This is a good example American hypocrisy. American lives are important and Iraqi (Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Libyan) non-combatant civilians are less so? We can go to their countries and blow them to bits and if they fight back they are terrorists and we will crush them and kill most of the fighters that would have been needed for internal protection. I am tired of this self-righteous attitude that Americas’ shit doesn’t stink. Where have you been? Look around you at the masterful and stink less way the USG is taking care of its own people … and they care about someone else’s people, give it a brake.

If you respect the military of this country, you are a bigger fool than even I thought. The men and women that do all the dirty work (not their fault) for the USG, but they are the best in the world, Moore expresses this in his movie that you watched. Forgive me for not knowing what goes with what, before or after, it still makes no sense. And of all my mistakes, I should have searched you out for the strategic targets to be hit in Iraq, when all I did was look at the death tolls, go figure. Knock the chip off your shoulder and face some facts. Moore does not impugn our soldiers; he is going after the USG for fabricating the reasons for sending our loved ones there in the first place to die. Then you wouldn’t have to be so concerned about showing caskets and whatnot of which I care little. You are not going to gain any actual knowledge of your own until you stop getting your information from lists and doing some of the research on your own, is all.

 

We don't show Iraqi or Afghanistani military casualties on TV either.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842

Burden of 'proof' is on the conspiracy nuts.  Rational people don't waste too much time defending reality.

I'm not going to say that I disagree with you outright, but I just don't trust anyone who looks at war in purely black-and-white terms like this. War is a costly, bloody, unfortunate business, but that doesn't mean that wars aren't worth fighting.

I think that it's important to note that something like 30,000 French civilians were killed during the Allied invasion of Normandy, many by US naval and air bombardment. Tragic? Yes. But I'd still say things would be much, much worse today if the US hadn't entered the war.

Having said that, WWII and Iraq/Afganistan were entered for very different reasons, and I absolutely respect everyones opinion about their worth, and wouldn't particularly care to divulge my own.

People die in war. Some of those people are invariably non-combatants. It's been the case in every war since the dawn of time.

Abraxas hit the nail on the head. Civilian casualties are part of warfare, and war isn't a pretty thing. BT, you seem to subscribe to the idea that war is a somewhat gentlemenly affair when prosecuted for morally correct reasons.

Which is total bullcrap. War is messy, it is costly, it is a very unpleasant and unglamorous thing. That's reality.

Agreed, and we don't show the civilian casualties either. They should all be shone, what we are supposed to hide. The real cost of war when one's involvement isn’t through a TV set is horrible and the American people should be able to see what the USG is doing in their name … all that freedom and democracy stuff. How long do you think a war would last then, I wonder?

NIST is the USG silly, why would they back away from their own findings? Have you read some of the stuff there? It is the USG story to a tee … this stuff is why there are people like me who want real answers not this garbage. Did you read their reports and if you did, did you filter them with logic or reality? At least you had the gumption to list something in defense of the USG and their nonsense, but these are the things we have problems with because this info is un-defendable. Rational people do not take the USG at their word and refuse to even check up on them ... ever?

FACT: Some windows near the impact area did indeed survive the crash. But that's what the windows were supposed to do—they're blast-resistant. Sooo, the fire was  so intense that it vaporized the titanium, steal, bodies, aircraft among many other things like 9 feet of steel reinforced concrete … but them damn windows sure are tough, come on. I haven’t found anything there besides the USG version of things.

It is not black and white at all and I am sorry if I left that impression, but we are up to 240 comments and there has been many other discussions. Just so I get to understand better, which war have we entered in the last 30 years, that you considered worth fighting from the perspective of the American people?

I cannot go back in history and say because we did not do this, that would or would not have happened. Not in this context anyway as I do not feel qualified. But I understand what you are saying. I cannot find it in me to compare WWII with Iraq on any level.

hypocrisy

Not really, I just think we should at least have one valid reason before we violate a sovereign nation, destroy their infrastructure, kill all those people you expect to die because it is war and occupy them for years is all. You sure do get strange impressions of me though, that's for sure.

Try looking at the clip here ...

That one works for me, how about you?

First, thank you, I always appreciate when these threads turn into a civilized discussion.

And yeah, I do know what you mean. But, I think that if you look a little bit, there is a fair analogy to be made between the Jewish population of Germany/Poland/elsewhere and the Kurds of Iraq. I'm not sure how the numbers stack up, exactly, but both populations were the target of chemical warfare, and both populations are significantly better off post-US intervention. The Kurdish North of Iraq has been surprisingly prosperous and stable the past four or so years. It's not something that you tend to hear about in the news, but it's a significant consideration, nonetheless.

Ok - time to get back off topic. What comes first, the chicken or the egg?

The egg. External fertilization of eggs was present long before the modern chicken had come around.

Geez.

How about this one: How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?

If it's Woodchuck Norris, all of it. If just an ordinary woodchuck, the equivalent of a one pound coconut.

The invasion of Grenada, for one.

Oh man, I love this thread! It provides me so much entertainment for me every day! Conspiracy nuts are my favorite kind of crazy