Gene there are two types of people, the free thinking types like you who understand the NWO agenda and then there are people who rely on government backed information outlets for their evidence. There are many glarinly obvious holes in the 9/11 official investigation. I just hope the sceptics on here start thinking for themselves when the next stage of the NWO is put into action.

I think you've just got the term confused to be honest Gene, it doesn't refer to just something someone wants to do, but a justification (sometimes a very warped one) they make to themselves or others that the world will ultimately be the better for what is apparently an evil act. For example, the use of atomic bombs on Japan to reduce overall casualties.

3. No I don't, I think that's very obviously not the case.

Oh man! If this hits 2000, I want that too

http://www.bollyn.com/making-sense-of-the-media-cover-up-of-9-11

Sparky sorry to carp on about Gene Hackmans question number 3.

Have you ever noticed how the American government seems to support Israels racist policies on Palestine?
America has chosen to target Muslim nations as these nations are defiant in a compromise with regard to the NWO agenda.

Im sure that you are doing your bit Orioles

As someone once said:
"Smart people believe weird things because they are skilled at defending beliefs they arrived at for non-smart reasons."

Add that to Confirmation Bias, added to a misunderstanding of probability theory and you have a team of clever conspiracy theorists.

To be honest I'm none too keen on involving myself in a head to head discussion on this subject - largely because it's a futile process and I have better things to do than take part in an online equivalent of whack-a-mole.
However, what I would say is that, a body of people who have, as a leading light, yon Griffin chap, are in very very desperate straits. I had a quick look through his book "Pearl H Revisited" a few months ago and what I found particularly distasteful and dishonest was the use of partial quotes from eyewitnesses that were used to not only mislead the reader, but also to attempt to put said eyewitnesses in the "conspiracy camp"; when in fact their full statements and descriptions were entirely in accord with the 911 Commision Report.
Sometimes there are just words on lines and in between them there is precisely nothing. I do wish you well with your beliefs though. no matter how misguided, and ultimately pointless they may be.

Sunset  Cisto
This is where you contradict yourself. The USA didn't need a 9/11 to invade Vietnam so why would they need one in 2001. Especially when they are the only super power now. The USA have always done what they want. They don't have to justify it by murdering thousands of their own people. That's daft.

30-year Anniversary: Tonkin Gulf Lie Launched Vietnam War


Media Beat (7/27/94)

By Jeff Cohen and Norman Solomon


Thirty years ago, it all seemed very clear.

"American Planes Hit North Vietnam After Second Attack on Our Destroyers; Move Taken to Halt New Aggression", announced a Washington Post headline on Aug. 5, 1964.

That same day, the front page of the New York Times reported: "President Johnson has ordered retaliatory action against gunboats and 'certain supporting facilities in North Vietnam' after renewed attacks against American destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin."

But there was no "second attack" by North Vietnam — no "renewed attacks against American destroyers." By reporting official claims as absolute truths, American journalism opened the floodgates for the bloody Vietnam War.

A pattern took hold: continuous government lies passed on by pliant mass media...leading to over 50,000 American deaths and millions of Vietnamese casualties.

The official story was that North Vietnamese torpedo boats launched an "unprovoked attack" against a U.S. destroyer on "routine patrol" in the Tonkin Gulf on Aug. 2 — and that North Vietnamese PT boats followed up with a "deliberate attack" on a pair of U.S. ships two days later.

The truth was very different.

Rather than being on a routine patrol Aug. 2, the U.S. destroyer Maddox was actually engaged in aggressive intelligence-gathering maneuvers — in sync with coordinated attacks on North Vietnam by the South Vietnamese navy and the Laotian air force.

"The day before, two attacks on North Vietnam...had taken place," writes scholar Daniel C. Hallin. Those assaults were "part of a campaign of increasing military pressure on the North that the United States had been pursuing since early 1964."

On the night of Aug. 4, the Pentagon proclaimed that a second attack by North Vietnamese PT boats had occurred earlier that day in the Tonkin Gulf — a report cited by President Johnson as he went on national TV that evening to announce a momentous escalation in the war: air strikes against North Vietnam.

But Johnson ordered U.S. bombers to "retaliate" for a North Vietnamese torpedo attack that never happened.

Prior to the U.S. air strikes, top officials in Washington had reason to doubt that any Aug. 4 attack by North Vietnam had occurred. Cables from the U.S. task force commander in the Tonkin Gulf, Captain John J. Herrick, referred to "freak weather effects," "almost total darkness" and an "overeager sonarman" who "was hearing ship's own propeller beat."

One of the Navy pilots flying overhead that night was squadron commander James Stockdale, who gained fame later as a POW and then Ross Perot's vice presidential candidate. "I had the best seat in the house to watch that event," recalled Stockdale a few years ago, "and our destroyers were just shooting at phantom targets — there were no PT boats there.... There was nothing there but black water and American fire power."

In 1965, Lyndon Johnson commented: "For all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there."

But Johnson's deceitful speech of Aug. 4, 1964, won accolades from editorial writers. The president, proclaimed the New York Times, "went to the American people last night with the somber facts." The Los Angeles Times urged Americans to "face the fact that the Communists, by their attack on American vessels in international waters, have themselves escalated the hostilities."

An exhaustive new book, The War Within: America's Battle Over Vietnam, begins with a dramatic account of the Tonkin Gulf incidents. In an interview, author Tom Wells told us that American media "described the air strikes that Johnson launched in response as merely `tit for tat' — when in reality they reflected plans the administration had already drawn up for gradually increasing its overt military pressure against the North."

Why such inaccurate news coverage? Wells points to the media's "almost exclusive reliance on U.S. government officials as sources of information" — as well as "reluctance to question official pronouncements on 'national security issues.'"

Daniel Hallin's classic book The "Uncensored War" observes that journalists had "a great deal of information available which contradicted the official account [of Tonkin Gulf events]; it simply wasn't used. The day before the first incident, Hanoi had protested the attacks on its territory by Laotian aircraft and South Vietnamese gunboats."

What's more, "It was generally known...that `covert' operations against North Vietnam, carried out by South Vietnamese forces with U.S. support and direction, had been going on for some time."

In the absence of independent journalism, the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution — the closest thing there ever was to a declaration of war against North Vietnam — sailed through Congress on Aug. 7. (Two courageous senators, Wayne Morse of Oregon and Ernest Gruening of Alaska, provided the only "no" votes.) The resolution authorized the president "to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the United States and to prevent further aggression."

The rest is tragic history.

Nearly three decades later, during the Gulf War, columnist Sydney Schanberg warned journalists not to forget "our unquestioning chorus of agreeability when Lyndon Johnson bamboozled us with his fabrication of the Gulf of Tonkin incident."

Schanberg blamed not only the press but also "the apparent amnesia of the wider American public."

And he added: "We Americans are the ultimate innocents. We are forever desperate to believe that this time the government is telling us the truth."

Its quite disturbing Gene that people on here would much rather believe the U.S Governments official line, than even contemplate the evidence of independent experts. The US Government would not need to have thousands of insiders to `keep quiet` if 9/11 was an inside job. Top levels of security allow people to do their job but without the knowledge of any consequencies. Israeli intellegence agents could easily have planned these events without the knowledge of people `opening doors`for them.

The American Government is a corrupt organisation who supports racist and terrorist policies against muslim nations. It allows thousands of its own young soldiers to lose their lives in third world countries. The people who rule this corrupt organisation are war mongering gangsters. How many wars have started since the CIA was created in 1947 with Nazi intellegence and look at how the muslim race been persecuted since the state of Israel was formed in 1948.

America claims to be `anti terrorists` yet they support the terrorist polices of Israel against Palestine. Yet accuse Iran of being a terrorist threat, even though Iran has not started a war in over 200 years. Come on people wake up.

Britain and America granted the Jews somebody elses country after the war. What right did they have granting the Jews the land of another nation? It was not the muslims who where to blame for the holocaust, it was the anti semitic christians. So the Palestinians have been dispersed and lost their land to make way for a Zionist idea. It was not the muslims who persecuted the Jews yet they are the ones that are suffering the injusice.

There is no Lawful defenition of `terrorism` but using military warefare against a nation to force a change in political idealism to comply with your own. This is also terrorism.

This giant thread is slowing down the forum

I shall soon campaign to have it pulled.

And i shall say it was not a natural collapase and that the thread was pulled.

The herd?

If you're framing that as moral logic, I can't agree Naydam.

A recent Department of Justice guide for investigators of criminal and extremist groups lists “constitutionalists” and “survivalists” alongside organizations like Al-Qaeda and the Aryan Brotherhood.  The 120-page, “Law Enforcement Sensitive” guide to “Investigating Terrorism and Criminal Extremism – Terms and Concepts” describes itself as “a glossary designed primarily as a tool for criminal justice professionals to enhance their understanding of words relating to extremist terminology,

A Demos report published today, The Power of Unreason, argues that secrecy surrounding the investigation of events such as the 9/11 New York attacks and the 7/7 bombings in London merely adds weight to unsubstantiated claims that they were "inside jobs".

It warns of the dangers posed by conspiracy theories – from hindering counter-terrorism work by reducing public trust in the Government, to encouraging new alliances between extremists based on such theories – and recommends the Government fight back by infiltrating internet sites to dispute these theories.

No problem naydam, and my apologies too, I'm off out shortly so haven't time to reply. Farewell!

Naydam it was european anti semitic christians, who held facist beliefs who where the enemy of the Jewish race, not the Palestinian people. You obviously feel that injustice is the way of the world so everybody should just accept it.
Karma is a wonderful thing Naydam

Naydam it was not the Muslims. Are you getting it?