Political false-flag attack

[spooked911]

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2011/03/indiana-prosecutor-floats-fake-assassination-scott-walker-resigns/36086/

Carlos Lam: "As an aside, I've been involved in GOP politics here in Indiana for 18 years, and I think that the situation in WI presents a good opportunity for what's called a "false flag" operation. If you could employ an associate who pretends to be sympathetic to the unions' cause to physically attack you (or even use a firearm against you), you could discredit the public unions. Currently the media is painting the union protest as a democratic uprising and failing to mention the role of the DNC and umbrella union organizations in the protest. Employing a false flag operation would assist in undercutting any support that the media may be creating in favor of the unions."

Quite a statement!

Yeah, it's just so CRAZY to think the political-military-industrial complex would do a false-flag attack on a much larger scale, to suit their own political agenda... right?

[Bolo Boffin]

1. No one thinks you're crazy because you think false-flag operations have happened in history, spooked

[zappaman]

2. +1 n/t

[spooked911]

3. gee, thanks!

so, why so much resistance to 9/11 being a false-flag attack?

[SDuderstadt]

4. That would be the abject lack of...

evidence, dude.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SDuderstadt]

14. Why, Spooked!

What an UGLY thing to say! I abhor ugliness. Does this mean we are not friends any more?
You know, Spooked, if I thought you weren't my friend, I just don't think I could bear it.

[LARED]

19. Spooked is pretty cranky tonight

I hope all is well.

[SDuderstadt]

20. I think we might be into a whole new level of....

bizarre, now.

But, what would you expect from someone who questioned why the FDNY didnt catch the WTC jumpers in their nets?

[zappaman]

22. no worries

larry is back and the exciting new 9/11 revelations due next week probably have spooked all riled up

[jberryhill]

24. Well, if anyone would know about people needing to be caught with nets...

...then we may have an expert on the subject of such nets being wielded by men in white suits.

[spooked911]

26. SDuderstadt--

I have never considered you a friend. I find your attitude about 9/11 and related issues to be very disturbing.

What I wrote was pretty mild, really. You know I have written much worse.

The fact is, you and the other OCTists have destroyed this forum, which used to be a pretty good place for 9/11 research and info. Now this place is just a joke, with the incessant mockery and willful obfuscation put on by the OCTists here. I know that was your goal all along, but still, it's a shame.

[LARED]

27. 'willful obfuscation put on by the OCTists'

Where? Point to a post.

[spooked911]

28. you're such a card!!!

LOL

[LARED]

30. As usual, can't back your accusations.

On another issue I asked you to respond to your post that there were nukes at Japans Nuclear reactors. You never responded. Why?

[spooked911]

35. It's funny because

the vast majority of SDuderstadt's posts are willful obfuscation, and you do the same thing too.

It's long been clear that you and SD do not argue in good faith. Your only point is to mock and deflect.

There are some OCTists here who do argue in good faith, and I can actually learn something from them. They actually take my posts at face value and try to respond to the prepositions I put out. They actually treat me like a person.


But in any case, I guess I missed that post of yours about Japanese nuclear reactors. I wasn't deliberately avoiding it.

[LARED]

36. I think you need to look up the word

obfuscation

[spooked911]

37. why?

you just defined it perfectly, right there!

:)

[LARED]

42. Well if you say so -- nt

[SDuderstadt]

40. Says the guy who couldn't understand why...

FDNY didn't catch WTC jumpers with their nets. I swear, I am not making that up.

And, simply disagreeing with Spooked on the facts is hardly "obfuscation".

[SDuderstadt]

32. "9/11 research and info"

Are you TRYING to set a record for unintentional irony, dude?

[zappaman]

33. this forum has been destroyed?

if so, it's because much like other forums that deal with nonsense, people get tired of having to try and back up their fantasy-assertions and move on.
You are one of the few who hasn't.
Maybe you should start your own forum where people can post pictures that "don't look right" to them.

[hack89]

5. Lack of evidence. nt

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hack89]

23. No - I'm quite happy

started the day watching my son play soccer. Wrapped it up watching a movie with my family. Job is going great and the Bruins are in the play offs. I have no reason to be miserable - I know this forum is not the real world.

[spooked911]

29. glad to hear

My daily life is great too. But still, I can see a lot of ugliness and strangeness outside of my little world, and I feel compelled to speak out about it. Do you deny that a lot of very disturbing things have happened to our politics since 9/11?

[zappaman]

6. hmmmm...maybe because you have no evidence?

for "mini-nukes" or "green-screened planes".
the real question is why do you embrace the idea of 9/11 being a false-flag attack without any evidence?
And no, "this picture looks funny" is not evidence.

[spooked911]

8. I have evidence... you just choose not to accept it

too bad

[SDuderstadt]

12. Your "evidence" is...

laughable, dude.

[Larry L. Burks]

16. Think God I got here when I did

That's OK spook. Thing are heating up. With 9/11. This week. A lot of new stuff coming out. Let me show you what I'm talking about.

[LARED]

17. Nice to see you're back Larry

The place just wasn't the same without your compelling rejoinders.

[SDuderstadt]

21. I think Larry just might have...

"manipulated gravity" a tad too much, if-you-know-what-I-mean.

[zappaman]

18. welcome back!

looking forward to some new info!

[spooked911]

25. so let me get this straight

1) false-flag operations have indeed happened in history
2) a political operative in modern day America proposes conducting a false-flag attack
3) but-- 9/11 couldn't have been a false-flag operation, because there is no evidence whatsoever that it was, despite reams and reams of evidence that the official story is wrong.

You guys are simply amazing.

[zappaman]

31. that's about right

except for this...
"but-- 9/11 couldn't have been a false-flag operation, because there is no evidence whatsoever that it was,"(that part is true) "despite reams and reams of evidence that the official story is wrong."

where are these reams and reams that point to the official story being wrong?
for that matter, where are the reams and reams that point to "no planes" and "mini-nukes"?

but hey, you are almost there.
Lost that last little bit and you are part of the real world!

[LARED]

7. Let me see if I understand

You post an article where someone postulates that the situation in WI was an example where a false flag operation could have easily been executed by someone starting a fight, or slightly worse, in order to undercut union sympathies.

There is no evidence of any false flag operations in WI, nor is there any evidence of activities by outsiders designed to make unions look bad. Only that would have been a relatively simple plan to execute if some entity desired to do so.

Then you want to compare this potential scenario that did not happen to the attack on 9/11 in an effort to support your pet CT?

All I can say is wow.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[zappaman]

13. good reply

thanks for clearing it up!
WOOOO!

[LARED]

15. Wow, that was unexpected.

A simple "yes you understand my post correctly" would have sufficed.

[MinM]

34. Tried-and-true Right Wing Tactic: Merrell McCullough, Mary McFate...

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/MinM/139


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/MinM/287


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/MinM/285

[spooked911]

38. thanks-- good stuff in there if one follows the links

this false-flag stuff has clearly been used by the right-wing for years.

I have every reason to believe that something on a much larger scale occurred on 9/11.

[jberryhill]

39. Yes, the unrealized stupid fantasy of a deput prosecutor for an Indiana County proves it!

It proves that it is hard to keep a lid on a single email proposing a stupid idea.

Fortunately, for the 9/11 conspirators, there were apparently no emails, memos or other communications turned up over a decade, and everyone who came in contact with any has maintained their silence.

[SDuderstadt]

41. Hey, wait!

The deputy prosecutor is from Indiana.

Spooked IS from Indiana.

Using Spooked's "logic", doesn't that prove Spooked is "in on it"?

[spooked911]

45. you know darn well they covered up everything relating to 9/11 tightly--

national security, ya know. The govt only leaked out stuff they WANTED us to see.

[mcollins]

43. um. Is the OP saying democrats are involved in false flag ops

in Wisconsin?

"Currently the media is painting the union protest as a democratic uprising and failing to mention the role of the DNC and umbrella union organizations in the protest. Employing a false flag operation would assist in undercutting any support that the media may be creating in favor of the unions."

I am confused.

[spooked911]

44. No, I don't think so

the guy wanted to frame the dems in Wisconsin