"The War on Terror is a Hoax!"

[wildbilln864]

by Paul Craig Roberts:
"If America were infected with terrorists, we would not need the government to tell us. We would know it from events. As there are no events, the US government substitutes warnings in order to keep alive the fear that causes the public to accept pointless wars, the infringement of civil liberty, national ID cards, and inconveniences and harassments when they fly."

more at this link :hi:

[Lost4words]

1. are the terrorists hiring?

cause they have never been a threat to me, its the GD government I have learned to fear.

[leveymg]

2. Depends upon who you classify as a "terrorist". Quakers, peaceniks, capital punishment opponents

will do, if you're the former Governor Ehrlich of Maryland and his stooge, Lt. Gov. Steele.

Oh,yes, and then there are those PETA "terrorists" and "eco-terrorists" and really, really scary WTO protesters.

Please, spend another 50 billion dollars to protect us from them.

[LatteLibertine]

3. Our government

and the fact that is run/owned by corporations is the problem.

[wildbilln864]

4. yep! welcome to DU BTW.

:hi:

[Gregorian]

5. It was such a hoax that Bush sat in a classroom even after we were being attacked.

This is what I found to be the obvious reality. Andrew Card whispered in his ear, and all he would do was look silly. No he didn't jump up and race out of the room to take control. He let what he knew was happening happen. That is all one needed to know about his terrorism. It was a way of legitimizing their crimes. I do not have the evidence other than an illegal invasion, and dots that I feel can be connected.

[earth mom]

6. Gotta control the masses somehow.

Trouble is, Obama is selling the same bullshit.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

7. Huh?

:wtf:

He may have to "talk the talk" but so far I don't feel like he's trying to scare us silly like Bush, Ashcroft, and Ridge did and even DHS *mysteriously* let up on all of those phony terrorist "alerts" after the 2004 election. I think even Obama's press secretary was reluctant to use that phrase at one point.

Who is pushing all of this Obama=Bush junk anyway and why are you buying into it? Obama may not end up being perfect nor may he roll back everything that Bush has done yesterday- he DOES have one *hell* of a mess to clean up after Bush went and unilaterally changed the acceptable (and reasonable) standards of conduct in regards to anti-terror efforts- but there is NO WAY in my mind that Obama's efforts to combat terrorism will end up looking anything like Bush's efforts. If anything, I hope his efforts look more like the way Clinton apparently handled it post-1993 WTC bombing. He apparently READ his security briefings and LISTENED to what his FBI and CIA chiefs were telling him resulting in him being able to bust several terrorist plots (i.e. "Millennium Plot")- all without scaring the piss out of us and sending us shrieking and running down to the local hardware store to purchase thousands of rolls of duct tape. Heck, from what I can recall, his thwarting of terrorist plots hardly registered a blip on the news.

The only major anti-terror initiative that Obama has been talking about AFAIK is stepping up our efforts against the Taliban and Al-Queda in Afghanistan, which IMHO is a perfectly legitimate action (although I suspect that most of the major player are currently in the tribal regions of Pakistan).

What BS is he "selling" that is so bad?

[earth mom]

8. I think for myself. I don't have cable so I don't listen to the talking heads peddling their shit.

I don't buy into the terra terra bullshit that Obama and the government are peddling that only serves to control the masses.

From reading your post, I can see that they have you right where they want you-terrified and afraid that all those big bad muslims are gonna travel thousands of miles just to get YOU. :eyes:

p.s. There is no such thing as Al Queda.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

9. Interesting reply

I would hardly describe myself as living in perpetual terror BUT I was pretty scared right after 09/11/01, which AFAIK really did happen, and I think most people here and elsewhere (myself included) are justifiably worried about something horrible like that happening again- probably even more so had we not gone after Al-Queda and the Taliban in Afghanistan although, of course, Bushco screwed THAT up as well as failing to care enough to try to prevent what happened on 09/11/01. Most everything else Bushco did post-9/11/01 has been disastrous, silly, wierd, or simply used in one way or another in order to promote the right's political agenda at the expense of the public. I don't endorse any of it and I wouldn't support more of the same under President Obama but I don't believe that he will respond the same way as Bush to terrorism.

I don't have a "kill all ragheads" mentality that our "friends" on the right seem to have and I definitely don't believe we need to be invading/bombing/regime-changing every muslim country out there in response to what happened on 09/11/01 but we definitely need to bring the perpetrators to justice- whomever (and wherever they may be).

In regards to your assertion that there is no such thing as Al-Queda, who(m) exactly do you blame for what happened on 09/11/01? Irregardless of the actual existence of Al-Queda (or the source of their funding, training, leadership thereof), it's abundantly clear that somebody (or a group of somebodys) wants to see fewer of us. Who do you suggest that might be and what do YOU think should be done about it? An inquiring mind would like to know.

BTW: I don't rely on the corporate whore media for my information. I used to watch them 24-7-365 but I kicked THAT habit a LONG time ago.

[wildbilln864]

10. WTF!?

"In regards to your assertion that there is no such thing as Al-Queda, who(m) exactly do you blame for what happened on 09/11/01?"

George W. Bush and Dickhead Cheney! That's who. Ever heard of "Able Danger"?

[CJCRANE]

12. It is possible to have both

Al-Qaeda and Bush-Cheney implicated in 9/11.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

13. As evil as Bush-Cheney were/are

I don't believe that they MIHOP. I'm not even sure I believe that they LIHOP but they most certainly took FULL (political) ADVANTAGE of it AFTER it happened. It certainly proved to be useful in getting their extremist agenda accomplished post-09/11/01, particularly their plans to invade Iraq, however I have sincere doubts whether they organized and/or simply allowed 09/11/01, something that no politician in his/her right mind would want as a stain on their record regardless of the POTENTIAL benefits thereof. Clinton would've probably been executed had 09/11/01 had happened on HIS watch I imagine. I imagine that Bush-Cheney were relieved by Bush's sudden stratospheric rise in the polls post-9/11/01.
Plus, given how incompetent they have proven themselves to be it would be a near-miracle that they could've successfully planned AND covered up their involvement in 09/11/01. Michael Moore once made the suggestion in "Dude, Where's My Country?" that the Saudis (or at least a member or members of the royal family) MAY have had something to do with 09/11/01, a reasonable question IMHO since Bushco classified so much stuff about the Saudis in the 09/11 report and helped get members of the Bin Laden family out of the US unusually quickly right after 09/11/01 but I'm still not convinced that Bushco MIHOP or LIHOP.

[wildbilln864]

14. I have always found it very odd....

that most of the guys Bush appointed signed on to a document advocating invading Iraq and over throwing Saddam, and they realized that the people would not go for that without some "new Pearl Harbor event" to rally the populace behind that invasion. Read "Rebuilding America's Defenses" here. And why did Bush and the Secret Service know that he'd be safe and had that there was no plane hijacked and targeting Bush in that school that day. He stayed there 30 minutes +/- after being told America was under attack! Why not protect those children, Bush, and the SS?
:banghead:

[Proud Liberal Dem]

16. I agree

that there are a lot of wierd coincidences, connections, and questions about Bush's reactions to the event (I AM familiar with PNAC and its signatories) but in the absence of any hardcore evidence- a "smoking gun" if you will- I will probably continue to remain skeptical that Bushco MIHOP or LIHOP. I really believe that the reason that 09/11/01 happened is more of a mixture of incompetence and/or tragic inattention to terrorism by Bushco during the first few months of his (mis-)administration. That Bush didn't get impeached for his gross dereliction of responsibility for 09/11/01- knowing what we know now about his inattention and neglect- will continue to mystify me.

[CJCRANE]

11. "terra terra bullshit that Obama and the government are peddling".

That's a bizarre statement. You're just muddying the waters.

[earth mom]

15. Obama is continuing the terra terra terra bullshit-He even gave orders to bomb Pakistan.

How much clearer do the waters need to be until you see the truth?

[JohnyCanuck]

17. 7/7 Ripple Effect (video)

This video certainly raises some interesting issues:

"Regarding the 7/7/2005 terrorist attacks in London, let
us look at the facts, and what we were told, and compare them.
Then, using Ockham’s Razor and common-sense, let us see what
conclusions are to be drawn, so we can all understand what
most likely really did happen that day."

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8756795263359807776
(57 min)


or just search for "7/7 Ripple Effect" at
http://video.google.com

[CRF450]

18. Too much tinfoil hat wearing here.

I'm sorry but we really were attacked by terrorists. Bush fucked us over with invading Iraq for no friggin reason, and pretty much just about everything else that got us in the mess we are in now.

[JohnyCanuck]

19. At one time.....

Operation Northwoods and Operation Gladio would have been just mere conspiracy "theories" too.

U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba
Book: U.S. Military Drafted Plans to Terrorize U.S. Cities to Provoke War With Cuba

By David Ruppe

In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.

Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.

The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.

America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662

The Strategy of Tension
By Nafeez Ahmed

SNIP

The “strategy of tension” denotes a highly secretive series of interconnected covert operations conducted jointly by the CIA and MI6 largely in Western Europe during the this period. Well-documented by several respected historians, confirmed by official inquiries, and corroborated by former intelligence officials, the “strategy of tension” is one of those unsavoury moments in contemporary history that we don’t learn about in school, or even university.

My favourite book on the subject, and the most authoritative in my view, is Dr. Daniele Ganser’s NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe (2004). Published in the UK as part of the “Contemporary Security Studies” series of London-based academic press Routledge, Ganser’s study is the first major historical work to bring the “strategy of tension” into the mainstream of scholarship.

During the Cold War, indeed through to the late 1980s, the United States, United Kingdom, and Western European governments and secret services, participated in a sophisticated NATO-backed operation to engineer terrorist attacks inside Western Europe, to be blamed on the Soviet Union. The objective was to galvanize public opinion against leftwing policies and parties, and ultimately to mobilize popular support for purportedly anti-Soviet policies at home and abroad – most of which were really designed to legitimize brutal military interventions against nationalist independence movements in the “Third World”.

Ganser was a Senior Researcher at the Center for Security Studies in the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich, before he moved to Basel University to teach history. Citing the transcripts of European parliamentary inquiries; the few secret documents that have been declassified; interviews with government, military and intelligence officials; and so on, Ganser shows how intimately the British were involved.

http://nafeez.blogspot.com/2007/05/strategy-of-tension.html