Current mood: enraged

(Please forgive the cursing, im normally not this pissed off.)

The blog that I posted before this is serious. It is not a joke, and it has and will affect all of you. The Bush administration has already made our country into the most dispised and disresepcted nation worldwide, and it is time that we fight for our rights, and the constitution, and for what JFK and the great leaders of our country did before they were assasinated by our own fucking  government.

Up until this point, I have thought that I need to get out of America. We aren't safe. And I am not talking about from people in other parts of the world, I am talking about from our own government and high ranking officials. 9/11 was staged so that we could go to Iraq (which had NO CONNECTION to the ALSO FAKE 9/11 PLANE HIJACKERS WHICH BTW 5/7 OF THESE PEOPLE ARE ALIVE AND HAVE TURNED UP BACK IN THEIR HOME COUNTRIES) and our government could make money off of their oil. (BTW, the specific people giving orders to stay are the ones who own companies profiting from the oil there) Not only that, but the Bush administration and the CIA and intelligence agencies in our country have everything in place to start a NUCLEAR WAR AGAINST IRAN. THEY ONLY NEED A REASON TO DO IT. KEEP YOUR EYES OPEN FOR THE NEXT FUCKING STAGED ATTACK THAT KILLS THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT PEOPLE TO SCARE THEM INTO SURRENDING THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND BRINGING THESE TERRIBLE PEOPLE CLOSER TO THE WAR WORLD 3 AGAINST CHINA AND RUSSIA. Thank intelligent people (the UN) for being a brick wall against these stupid fuckers.

YES. I am ANGRY. You should be too. The world is so fucking fucked up. Do we stay silent? Or speak to break it? Just be aware of what is going on around you. And for ANYONE who thinks that Bush is a good president and his doing his best, you are severely wrong. Watch this, just watch so you at least know the truth about what is happening in your own country. This is RESEARCHED  SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE that shows that 9/11 was staged and explains what the bigger picture is, and how all the history and research comes together.  The reason it makes sense, is because this is the TRUTH. Not like these bullshit lies we've been soaking up.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5004704309041471296

Just for the record: My main point in my blog wasn't that 9/11 was staged (although, as Ben pointed out it definetly was expected to say the least) it was that  they need to be exposed for what the did/allowed to happen. No one has been rightfully penalized for the crimes of 9/11. Not ONE person. Except countries that had nothing to do with it.

Back to Bush. He put us trillions of dollars in debt and is being a puppet for a bigger picture. He's a fucking moron and I almost feel bad for him for being so fucking ignorant. This is very sad for our country. We used to be one of the most respected countries in the world, and now look at it. We are shattered by our own leaders. (heart breaks)

10:24 PM - 6 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add

Hey, just so you know, these comments below here are only to show what other people said. However, Ben Casey says a lot of bullshit. He likes using big words and hearing himself talk. For every huge long paragraph he said, I agreed with maybe one sentence. out of all of it.

Ben Casey

I have another friend who goes for the controlled demolition theory. The problem is that that shows a pretty telling misunderstanding of the way intelligence works in this country. For every successful intelligence operation - something like blowing up an office building under a false flag - there's a dozen middling ones and a hundred screwups, plenty of those spectacular screwups. The massive reputation covert operatives have in this country is basically the result of a long-term and very successful PR campaign by the money-grubbing CIA, which directly benefits from the perception that the billions and billions they are thrown actually does anyone except their corporate backers any good. That in mind, a successful 9/11-style operation would take an astounding amount of money, foreplanning, and skill - things which the Bush government each lacks in spades. (This is a group that put a horse judge in command of FEMA and made a man who felt it inncumbent to cover a statue's boobs at taxpayer expense Attorney-General. Incompetent government isn't just what they do, it's the basis of their philosophy.) A far simpler answer - one that does not require a miracle on the level of the immaculate conception to have actually happened successfully and off of the public radar - is that 9/11 was a deliberate failure of intelligence. I've read all of the 'proofs' it's a controlled demolition. For Chrissakes, at the very least planes were flown into the World Trade Center under the direct watch of the Bush Administration, which inherited one of the world's most effective terrorism-monitoring forces. What need is there to bring explosives into that? Every sober investigation into the subject has produced two inevitable facts: one, the American intelligence community (pack of incompetent jackals as they normally are) was acutely aware that a major anti-American terror cell had serious plans on or around 9/11 involving airline hijackings. And two, Bush's government either deliberately or accidentally ignored their warnings. Both of those things are true; controvert them and you're insane. On 9/11, two planes flew into the WTC (I won't get into the Pentagon). This, too, is incontrovertible. The same week, Congress pushed through a bill to curtail American civil liberties; the neocons in government planned an invasion of Iraq - always the first step in the Project for the New American Century's grand scheme - and the US set out in a blind rage to smash Afghanistan into powder. All of those are the events of September 2001. The bottom line, so far as I'm concerned: Bush and his puppeteers gained a lot of power as a result of a historical tragedy. Did they engineer it? No. Not only no, but hell no. Why would they? They just sat back and let it happen. That way the terrorists look more dangerous and anyone who calls bullshit on them, says they should have actually done something instead of just sitting on their thumbs, is marginalized as a blind critic of the administration. A historical analogy, and one of which I am very fond, is the Reichstag fire - the one famous for making Hitler who he was. The common story is that Hitler set fire to the Reichstag himself (well, had it set on fire, but you know what I mean). The way it actually went is that the man generally called a 'scapegoat' - a Dutch socialist trade-union activist who resented Hitler's behavior over something or other - actually did what he was accused of, firebombed the Reichstag and all that. Does that make Hitler any better or worse? No. He still capitalized on a disaster to seize unlimited power and used that unlimited power to ends that make his name synonymous with evil more than half a century after his death. What saying 9/11 was faked reminds me of, to bring the analogy home, is stridently insisting Marinus van der Lubbe was innocent. It's both improbable and meaningless. What ultimately matters is that Bush is an authoritarian shithead and the hands up his ass ultimately want the world torn apart to serve the interests of the capitalist elite. They didn't need a 9/11 badly enough to make one happen themselves; that would entail a substantial risk of being caught. Instead, they were perfectly willing to sit back and let their plans take their slow course when a shortcut just so happened to fall into their laps. The kind of evil the PNAC folks are is a different and far worse kind than the villainous-laughing James Bond type that would blow up the WTC. They're genial, besuited demons. Their game is more justifying crushing the testicles of children with a wicked chimera of the extra-constitutional legal tradition and the Nietzcheian will to power. (You think I'm kidding? Google John Yoo and the relevant words sometime. And remember - he's a senior Bushie official.) Posted by Ben Casey on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 at 1:32 AM [Remove] [Reply to this]

	Useless Faith	you're stupid Posted by Useless Faith on Thursday, August 03, 2006 at 12:00 PM [Remove] [Reply to this]

	Once upon a time....	I agree with the stuff you said, but have you watched the video? It explains scientifically how although the planes flew into the towers, there were still explosives placed. My main point in my blog wasn't that 9/11 was staged (although, as you said it definetly was expected to say the least) it was that  they need to be exposed for what the did/allowed to happen. Posted by Once upon a time.... on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 at 8:09 AM [Remove] [Reply to this]

	Ben Casey	I'm giving it a watch now. There's a few problems I've noticed already a few minutes into the speech (Northwoods was one in a host of batshit insane maneuvers intended to cause WW3 proposed by a Pentagon which really, really wanted to fight WW3 for some reason; the Bay of Tonkin incident wasn't necessarily staged). The introducing speaker poses the entire affair as something between the forces of freedom and the forces of tyranny. I don't think it's as simple as all of that; to make a long story short, it's not a tyrants kind of thing as much as a vultures kind of thing. The PNACers want to dominate the world so as to ensure a certain kind of corporation-friendly government remains in power everywhere. 'Who stands to benefit?' is an excellent question. While the Islamic world might not have wanted to piss the US off at it, al Qaeda certainly would: their entire strategy is to create an emnity for the US to Islam, which would, they hope, result in a reunification of the Islamic world in some manner of radical theocratic caliphate. As for the 9/11 stuff - here's what's wrong with what the panel poses as problems. The buildings coming down 'straight and fast' happened becase each floor had thousands of tons falling onto it when the structure failed in the middle. Here's a poor-quality but illustrative video on how the collapse of one of the large towers happened. Notice the lowering boom of dust there? That doesn't happen in a controlled demolition - that's because half of the building is falling onto the other half, which has lost the structural integrity to sustain its own weight. In a controlled demolition, the whole enchilada falls onto the bottom of the building. The metallurgical problems with the molten metal and what have you are unusual in that they were heated in the laboratory, in laboratory conditions, all of that. The molten metal in the field had other shit going on that could easily explain the minor inconsistencies between it and lab-tested stuff. (For instance, being doused in white-hot jet fuel, something it doesn't appear that they simulated in the lab.) The cover-up stuff the next guy does makes sense when you consider the intentional dereliction angle: obviously the Bushies want to cover up the fact that they've intentionally screwed the pooch. 'Why were those planes not intercepted?' Because the authorization to intercept them wasn't given until later, when they were 100% sure that people were flying planes into buildings. He says this is a reason the government-knowing-about-it-and-doing-nothing angle doesn't work; that's balderdash. You don't just scramble fighters to intercept civilian aircraft, hijackings or no. Maybe if there's a war on, but there wasn't one on at the time. 'Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden were bitter enemies - why didn't we attack Saudi Arabia?' Goddamn right. On the subject of I think exposing them for what they did / allowed to happen is redundant. Their aims are evil enough; they're basically trying to play Risk with the world. Their political grandstanding with gay marriage and other nonsense is simply an effort to build up a rapport with the religious conservatives, who are insane gnostic world-haters who can readily be convinced the entire world is their enemy and needs to be shot. The ultimate objective is just ensuring that their children will be able to make the same filthy lucre they can. Their angle is more stuff like trying to convince Russia that there's something wrong with Siberia so they can buy the land up for dirt-cheap; stabilizing Central Asian dictatorships where dissenters are boiled alive because they'll let them build oil pipelines. It's slick, well-organized teamwork for avarice. The problem I see is this: I don't think the idea that the WTC attacks were faked is credible. It relies on a lot of coincidences and wah-wah like cell phones working better than they should and sounds of fighting not being present and so forth. That particular theory presumes that the government is simultaneously competent enough to conduct what would be history's first secret controlled demolition (you've probably seen one before on TV - they're big and loud) and yet incompetent enough to botch piddling things. Most people know nothing about the entire affair - about PNAC and such with their hands up the Bush Administration's asses either. The WTC attack pretty clearly happened - planes flying into buildings. It's generally agreed that Bush & co at least dropped the ball - I'd say intentionally. But that ultimately isn't important - what's important is people recognize the neocons' base, how they work and what they're up to. The Administration actions post-9/11 were pretty clearly along a timetable which clearly started veering from reality. Osama bin Laden was probably intended to be captured by the time the Iraq war started - maybe as an October surprise in 2002 - but he was uncooperative with the plans of the PNAC folks. Regardless, the Iraq war went on schedule. And based on the saber-rattling against Iran, it was clear that Iran was intended to be next - but with Iraq turning into a horrible mess instead of a corrupt, US-friendly kleptocracy, the PNACers reassessed and realized that a simultaneous invasion of Iran would be flatly suicidal. I find this to be extremely informative, along with the rest of the Rotten library (really - it's amazingly good for something apparently attached to Rotten). They're the people who are pulling the strings in the Bush administration and the modern Republican Party. Back to the WTC explosives theory: for me, the nail in the coffin is this. You've already watched planes flown into the World Trade Center. Do you get extra points for bringing down the towers? In any event, a lot of people are dead and a national landmark is destroyed. The impact is the same. And that impact is that the American people give you a free pass to bomb Kabul and Baghdad to ruins. (WTC-7 is a horse of a different color. I don't suspect it's a controlled demolition, but if it was the aim was clearly insurance fraud on the behalf of someone attached to it. (It's not visible as a landmark and didn't have anyone or anything of value in it.)) Posted by Ben Casey on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 at 10:48 AM [Remove] [Reply to this]

	Useless Faith	I didn't realize you were this stupid. Posted by Useless Faith on Thursday, August 03, 2006 at 12:04 PM [Remove] [Reply to this]

	Once upon a time....	What you said about the buildings coming down, I dont know the exact tests and what the variables were that they used, but I have to believe that a group of people with PHDs in physics, which also requires an extensive backround of chemistry and mathematics, and demolition companies would not make those claims if they weren't sure of themselves. If they had any doubt, I believe they would have at least made a disclaimer. Posted by Once upon a time.... on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 at 12:01 PM [Remove] [Reply to this]

	Once upon a time....	Although everything you said makes a lot of sense, I think that because there are so many inconsistencies and "what ifs", that is why there should be an investigation. I think it IS credible. There are too many people with too much hard evidence to just discredit it. (Like the voice recordings in the planes not being able to pick up noise in the passenger cabin, even though they supposedly have "recordings" of peoples phone calls; and the hijackers being trained in California) I think they need more, but it is coming together. To say it isnt credible is to throw all the research of these people in the trash. Maybe it isnt fully COMPLETE, but you cant say it is uncredible. Posted by Once upon a time.... on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 at 11:56 AM [Remove] [Reply to this]

	Ben Casey	Well, sure. I didn't say it was false, merely incredible - and that definitely saying that there was a planned demolition requires evidence that hasn't been produced yet. The real question, I think, is this: why would they bother getting their hands dirty? Sitting back and letting people suffer so they can get ahead is basically their modus operandi. Look at New Orleans, for instance - they didn't have to make Hurricane Katrina, they just had to neglect it and throw out billions in no-bid contracts to Halliburton and associated companies for rebuilding, then try and use their bizzare and incomprehensible inaction in a time of crisis to discredit the local, Democratic government. I think of 9/11 as basically like that: a mixture between 'small government means we don't have to give a shit' and 'nobody could have predicted this horrible event which we had incontrovertible proof that was hanging over our heads, so we're blameless'. The only difference, I suppose, is that they haven't used the damage from Katrina to justify war on the atmosphere. (They don't need a justification for that one.) Posted by Ben Casey on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 at 2:12 PM [Remove] [Reply to this]

	Useless Faith	Pam is wrong, nothing you say makes any sense. You're just an idiot. Posted by Useless Faith on Thursday, August 03, 2006 at 12:05 PM [Remove] [Reply to this]

	KaReN	DUDE Im totally with you!  I was pissed months ago.. now Im just annoyed, cause there is nothing we can do.  There is nothing out there that the government doesnt have their fingers in, even the poor Indian Reservations. And its totally fucked up that the media has to brain wash us even more with these stupid videos like United 93 and Lets Roll. The only good movie to come out of this was V for Vendetta.. its not so subtil hidden message to start an anarchy, rise against and take over the evil government, and restore peace..  seeing how this movie is filled with current events and has a definite strong political sense.. could the infamous line "Remember, remember the 5th of November"  be instructions?  If so Im game!.. til then all we can do is get people to sit down for an hour and watch this internet vid. Im thinking some high official guy is going to get knocked off.. and hes going to be the scapegoat for everything so we stop blaming the gov and FBI. Posted by KaReN on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 at 2:08 AM [Remove] [Reply to this]

	Once upon a time....	I think there is something we can do about it. As long as we speak up, then people will be challenged and affected. The only thing that can make the situation worse is staying quiet. You know at the end of the video when that guy (forgot his name, bleh) said that on 9/11/06 they are going to stand at Ground Zero silently wearing shirts and holding signs that say "9/11 Truth Investigation" or w/e they said? We should do that on the U of A mall. Just silently, so no one will get in trouble or misrepresent the purpose. Posted by Once upon a time.... on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 at 8:14 AM [Remove] [Reply to this]

	Ben Casey	Oh, there's everything we can do. For one, have a crucial understanding that American politics at present is bullshit - but there's ways around it. A genuine leftist opposition party ('Gay marriage is evil! Civil unions are tolerable!' is not genuine opposition to 'Gay marriage is evil! God hates fags!', nor is 'We need to hand the military-industrial complex billions of dollars to blow the shit out of Afghanistan and only Afghanistan!' genuine opposition to 'We need to hand the military-industrial complex billions of dollars to blow the shit out of Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Switzerland!') would be an excellent direction to lean for. I'm not convinced that things will ever be hopeless in the kind of country that produced Roosevelt. Given that we're the kind of country that produced Reagan, it goes without saying they can get pretty shitty too. But there's always hope, however dim. The enemy is not all-powerful. He wants you to think that; he is a fawning philosophy major who believes for all of the world in the will to power and other such corporatist 'if we think it, we can do it' nonsense. That's the philosophical core of the enemy, anyway. The rank and file are just greedy capitalist scum who exploit the weaknesses of the American national character to abuse the rest of the world out of filthy lucre. (Look up the reform period of Russia sometime - specifically Gaidar and company - and you can see what happens when neoconservatives are given free license by the American public to fleece a country blind in the name of 'democratization' or 'freedom of enterprise'.) The nasty secret of the neoconservative wunderkinden is ultimately that they're not supermen who blow up towers with explosives on live television, but rather that the only thing that makes them any different from us is lots of money and a complete lack of morals. For all of their screaming and posturing, they're as human as anyone else. If nothing else, the icy hand of death will eventually put an end to their bullshit. (You ever actually read Ann Coulter et al? The new generation of neocons is so Goddamn dense and self-obsessed they couldn't properly tyrannize a coffee shop.) In the meanwhile, it is necessary we remain on top of their schemes and foil them wherever possible. In August I'm going to be voting for whoever I think will be the least likely to turn into a disgusting Republican lapdog in the primaries, and in November I'm going to be voting and encouraging my friends to vote with our brains instead of with our hearts. As unpleasant as the prospect of the DNCoids running the government is, they're at least well-meaning stumblebums as opposed to dangerously negligent thieves. (I feel obliged to inform that the 5th of November is Guy Fawkes Day; V wears a Guy Fawkes mask and the rhyme itself is centuries-old and about the reason Guy Fawkes Day is celebrated. GFD is a weird-ass British holiday that would be like if our distant ancestors celebrated 9/11 as Osama Bin Laden Day with airplane-shaped tarts and tall, office-buildingy firecrackers. And the source for V for Vendetta is older than you, but that's neither here nor there.) Posted by Ben Casey on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 at 2:58 AM [Remove] [Reply to this]

	Useless Faith	More words of idiocy.   Pam you thought that guy was smart? Posted by Useless Faith on Thursday, August 03, 2006 at 12:07 PM [Remove] [Reply to this]

	Once upon a time....	Thanks for your responses Ben. I always thought you were pretty bad ass in high school cuz I knew you were probably the most intelligent kid at GV. (You and Justin when he was there.)  Posted by Once upon a time.... on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 at 8:20 AM [Remove] [Reply to this]

	Ben Casey	It's my pleasure. Really, this is kind of what I do anyway. :-p Posted by Ben Casey on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 at 10:50 AM [Remove] [Reply to this]

Kricket

Heh, thanks for the comment invite bulletin. My opinion is simply this:  Whether or not 9/11 was real or staged is a moot point.  There is nothing we as a nation can do about all of the aftermath now except wait it out.  I know that sounds like a cop out, but I think that this nation's best option would be to wait for Bush' 11 replies - reply   # Gay Penguins OMG, this is hilarious. (And true.) Gay zoo penguins reject shy females Six gay penguins at a German zoo in the northern port city of Bremerhaven are still refusing to mate with females of the species flown in from Sweden last year. Zoo director Heike Kueck says the problem was that the female humboldt penguins have proven too shy in their advances. "The Swedes will not make the first move," he said. The females were flown in last year in a bid to bring the males to mate and help save the humboldt species from extinction. Ms Kueck said last year she was optimistic the initiative would be successful because zoo keepers had noticed that at one point a female penguin had managed to cause a couple of males to "separate". The zoo has 10 male penguins of which six have shown strong signs of preferring male company and formed couples among themselves. The initiative to "turn" the penguins and make them mate had prompted a furious response from gay rights groups. In a statement posted on its website, the zoo has sought to defend itself from fresh criticism. "We will be delighted if the penguins form even one heterosexual couple and manage to produce first an egg and then a little one," the zoo said. "But of course we accept the male couples that have formed and we are not trying to enforce heterosexuality, as we were accused of doing last year." 3 replies - reply   « More Entries » « Blog Archive » « Tags List » Profile pmeuph @ MindSay Leave a comment View My Full Profile View My Wiki Page RSS Feed Calendar November 2008 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 November 2006 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 August 2006 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Older Recent Visitors November 12th google November 10th google November 8th google November 6th google November 1st google October 26th google October 24th google October 22nd google October 20th google October 19th google October 14th google October 13th google